Banning Military Recruiting

[yeahwho]

It's hitting home, here is the local Seattle High School story, LINK (http://www.komotv.com/stories/36242.htm).

some excerpts;

"We didn't arrive at this decision lightly" says Garfield High PTSA co-chair Amy Hagopian. "They chase kids down the hall, they are very eager to find recruits, they call kids on the phone repeatedly and we feel they're aggressiveness is really over the top".

but there is a catch to stopping the military recruiting;

A provision in the No Child Left Behind Act, passed in 2002 protects military recruiting at all schools that receive federal funding. Schools can choose to ban military recruiting only if it decides to ban all recruiting, including recruiting by college campuses. If schools ban just military recruiting, it could lose federal funding.

They can't vote, so Uncle Sam may as well have 'em by the balls.

[ASsman]

A provision in the No Child Left Behind Act, passed in 2002 protects military recruiting at all schools that receive federal funding. Schools can choose to ban military recruiting only if it decides to ban all recruiting, including recruiting by college campuses. If schools ban just military recruiting, it could lose federal funding.
That is irony.


GHahahahahah!!!!!! OMG!! My children will be educated in European schools. Fuck this shit.

[D_Raay]

It's hitting home, here is the local Seattle High School story, LINK (http://www.komotv.com/stories/36242.htm).

some excerpts;

"We didn't arrive at this decision lightly" says Garfield High PTSA co-chair Amy Hagopian. "They chase kids down the hall, they are very eager to find recruits, they call kids on the phone repeatedly and we feel they're aggressiveness is really over the top".

but there is a catch to stopping the military recruiting;

A provision in the No Child Left Behind Act, passed in 2002 protects military recruiting at all schools that receive federal funding. Schools can choose to ban military recruiting only if it decides to ban all recruiting, including recruiting by college campuses. If schools ban just military recruiting, it could lose federal funding.

They can't vote, so Uncle Sam may as well have 'em by the balls.

Quite unsettling isn't it? Chasing young people down in hallways to urge them to potentially die over a bunch of lies.

[Whois]

That is irony.


GHahahahahah!!!!!! OMG!! My children will be educated in European schools. Fuck this shit.

A buddy of mine (Greek-American) and his wife (Greek) are planning on schooling their kids in.....wait for it....GREECE!

If they turn out anything like their parents, it'll be fantastic.

p.s. All recruiters lie...repeat twenty times.

[Ali]

All recruiters lie (http://images.ucomics.com/comics/db/2005/db050414.gif).

[bb_bboy]

They should have a career day at the high school, but only let representatives from the different armed forces show up - row after row and table after table of recruiters. Maybe even have some in disguises to not look like recruiters; then, surprise! I'm a recruiter. Then lock the kids in.

Seriously though, I'd rather have agressive recruiting than have aggressive drafting. While neither thought is comfortable, at least with one you still have to sign yourself up. Of course, you'll have some people saying, "damn, that recruiter tricked me into military service again!"

[Ali]

Seriously though, I'd rather have agressive recruiting than have aggressive drafting. While neither thought is comfortable, at least with one you still have to sign yourself up. Of course, you'll have some people saying, "damn, that recruiter tricked me into military service again!" Read whois' post

now repeat after me

All recruiters lie

your turn...

[ASsman]

Seriously though, I'd rather have agressive recruiting than have aggressive drafting. While neither thought is comfortable, at least with one you still have to sign yourself up. Of course, you'll have some people saying, "damn, that recruiter tricked me into military service again!"
Hmmm, I nearly choked on my food.

And no, drafting would be more helpful. Stronger actions will produce stronger response. Less people sitting on the fence like Qdrop, dick.
Take to the streets...etc.

[Qdrop]

Less people sitting on the fence like Qdrop, dick.

rational, pragmatic, centrist! (or independant, whatever)
get it right.

my views are rather drastic in one direction or the other, often quite hardline...

fence sitter implies that i'm basically just apathetic unable/unwilling to commit to anything.
that ain't me.

[ASsman]

rational, pragmatic, centrist! (or independant, whatever)
get it right.

my views are rather drastic in one direction or the other, often quite hardline...

fence sitter implies that i'm basically just apathetic unable/unwilling to commit to anything.
that ain't me.
Put some vaseline on that, fence sitter!

[bb_bboy]

All recruiters lie

I'm not disagreeing with that point. However, my reason is due to a lack of information on the subject.

But, I stand by my original remark. I don't necessarily agree with their tactics (see attempt at humor at beginning of my previous post), but I think that we are in a better situation with them actively and sucessfully recruiting people than with them actively and successfully drafting people. And, while it is once again a choice between the lesser of two evils, I think that the comparison is valid because when the recruiting fails then the drafting will likely begin.


Hmmm, I nearly choked on my food.

You should take bigger bites, bitch.

(Just kidding ASsman, just kidding.)

[D_Raay]

Well, in a perfect world, we should have no recruiting or drafting...

[bb_bboy]

That would be nice - but I don't think that we can expect that with our current administration vis a vis the performance of each of the characters on the world stage at this time.

[abcdefz]

...surely schools could have recruiting areas and prohibit recruiters from going into the halls. That's not so tough.

I would set up all the students with free e-mail accounts (or show them how to use hotmail or something, if they don't know already), and tell kids not to give out phone numbers; just e-mail addresses. Then give the kids e-mail access time a week or so later, at which time if they want to give out their phone number, they may.

Just train 'em. Recruiters are kind of like stalkers.

[ASsman]

Hmmm, but if it's voluntary why must kids be hounded?

No better than peddling heroin infront of elementary schools.

[enree erzweglle]

when my son was in high school he mentioned how sick and tired he was of the various army of one commercials because they played it on the televisions at his school several times a day. (these televisions broadcast school-related announcements and bits and pieces of the news and the kids were required to watch this stuff or at least to be quiet during it.) i hated that they were doing that--playing that commercial to them so frequently. and to boot, the recruiters were there lots. hated that too. if he had never mentioned this to me, i never would have known. i think when they do this and have recruiters on campus, the parents ought to know about it.

[K-nowledge]

Just make the military manditory for anyone, men and women, turning 18. That will get rid of those pesky recruiters.

[ASsman]

Just make the military manditory for anyone, men and women, turning 18. That will get rid of those pesky recruiters.
Mmmm, manditory service.

Actually I'm all for it. But I might then leave sooner than planned, the country that is.

[EN[i]GMA]

Yeah, end army recruiting.

That will go over well when soldiers are needed.

That's sensible.

[Schmeltz]

I think they only mean banning it in schools. And if soldiers are needed badly enough, there will be plenty of volunteers flocking to the standards.

[Ali]

but I think that we are in a better situation with them actively and sucessfully recruiting people than with them actively and successfully drafting people. And, while it is once again a choice between the lesser of two evils, I think that the comparison is valid because when the recruiting fails then the drafting will likely begin.OK, that's your POV and I accept that.

However, do you think that the people being "actively recruited" (an euphemism for coercion, if I ever heard one) are being told everything they need to know in order to make an informed choice? How different is fooling somebody into joining the Armed Forces to forcing them to join. Isn't it just a matter of semantics?

Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe the US Army really does tell candidates what will happen to them, I've never spoken to one. I was drafted, though, in South Africa, in 1989 . Managed to wriggle out of it by going to University until the Apartheid Regime crumbled and young white men were no longer forced to go and kill "terrorists" in Angola.

Anybody on this board been interviewed by an Armed Forces recruiter? Would you care to share?

Hey, Assman. Git yoh butt down to the local Recruiting office and let us know what they told you! A fly on the wall in that office I'd like to be. :cool:

P.S. Here's the whole Doonesbury (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=index&cid=1060) thread. Tres bien!

[Loppfessor]

p.s. All recruiters lie...repeat twenty times.


Mine didn't...he was one of the coolest dudes I've met. Although I will admit he was the exception 90% of them do lie a lot. Still this is where parents need to step in and make sure they're kids are getting the facts and making smart decisions.

[Ali]

Mine didn't...he was one of the coolest dudes I've met. Although I will admit he was the exception 90% of them do lie a lot. Still this is where parents need to step in and make sure they're kids are getting the facts and making smart decisions.Had you decided to join before you met him, or did he persuade you?

[yeahwho]

If in you wantin' to some preventin' here's this (http://www.iacenter.org/a16_draft-2.htm).