Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    10,639
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Historical Circumstance: End Of War As Army Recruiting Tool

    Aint this a kick in the old military butt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! President Obama will end the WAR!!!!!!!!!! ReUp, young soldiers, the Army gravy train is at the next stop!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Pitiful, just pitiful......................

    Source: VetVoice

    Well that didn't take long. Polls across America had been closed for less than 24 hours and Army Career Counselors were already exploiting Barack Obama's victory in an effort to recruit former soldiers back into units. This email was forwarded to me by an Iraq veteran and former Army captain who received it on Wednesday......................................... ......................

    For those who are unfamiliar, this means that if you're a former soldier who's still subject to being recalled to active duty (IRR), you can join a Reserve or National Guard unit on a contract that guarantees you won't go anywhere for at least two years. That's all well and good. But in this email, the career counselor seriously raises some eyebrows in suggesting that by the end of the two years, Obama "will have gotten us out of these other countries."

    So has this career counselor simply gone "rogue" on us? Or is this going to be the new method by which the Army attracts soldiers into--and back into--the ranks? Leaving aside for a moment the fact that the recruiter is making a promise he knows he can't keep, I'll be honest: I'd be lying if I said the prospect of an Obama administration hadn't made me consider the possibility of rejoining. So, in essence, this career counselor has probably just taken a logical, reasonable step.

    But larger questions become immediately apparent: Was this career counselor told to use this tactic by his chain of command or not? Is this going to be a shift in recruiting Army-wide? Is the Army going to use President Obama as a recruiting tool? If so, this would symbolize a stunning--if not totally rational--renunciation of the Bush administration and its handling of the military. If this becomes an Army policy, it represents a true "ding-dong the witch is dead" moment for the service.

    We'll be watching this closely to see if other, higher-ranking officers make similar statements. Because it's a fact that many of them have been eagerly awaiting this moment to begin the rebuilding process.

    More: http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2148

    I couldn't get a copy of the email to c/p here. Go to the site and read it for yourselves. This is genuinely historical and hilarious and noteworthy and so freaking ironic that I Just Want To Celebrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,274
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    58626

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychoblues View Post

    This email was forwarded to me by an Iraq veteran and former Army captain who received it on Wednesday......................................... ......................

    I couldn't get a copy of the email to c/p here.
    credibility.....

    "I would rather live my life as if there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't and die to find out there is."

    ~Albert Camus

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    10,639
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Whose "credibility" are you questioning, m'59?

    Quote Originally Posted by manu1959 View Post
    credibility.....
    In your post you only quote me as the originator of the statements made. I made one of them and it is true. The other was included in a quote from vetvoice.com but you failed to make that clear. Obviously your cred just dropped with me by about 20% but I don't imagine you'll be losing any sleep over that, will you, cowgirl!??!???!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!!???!?!??!?!??!?

    How's that hangover doing!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

    God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I Just Want To Celebrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Jefferson, Georgia
    Posts
    2,734
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    7
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    172492

    Default

    The article is important in another way. If the army is employing these tactics to recruit it will threaten the safety of those who are enlisted! Anyone who has served knows this, one would rather be shorthanded in a battle exchange than to have even one member present who is not commited. Now true being shot at tends to motivate one to defenses he may not have known he had however i would think a wide recruiting standard promoting the fact that it is unlikely a recruit will see battle is unwise as it would threaten to fill the ranks with soldiers who enlisted because they expected a cakewalk. This would certainly tend to make remaining members vulnerable and less safe.

    We could assume that training would change the mindset of those soldiers somewhat and in some cases maybe it would but I think an all volunteer force is vulnerable to a philosophy that encourages one to think they will not be involved in conflict. If this officer is concerned, which I'm sure he is and for the reasons I mention more than a political agenda, that would concern me.
    If you continue to think the way you have always thought, you will continue to get what you have always got!

    A government big enough to provide you everything you need is big enough to take everything you have!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    10,639
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Good catch, emmie!!!!!!!!!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by emmett View Post
    The article is important in another way. If the army is employing these tactics to recruit it will threaten the safety of those who are enlisted! Anyone who has served knows this, one would rather be shorthanded in a battle exchange than to have even one member present who is not commited. Now true being shot at tends to motivate one to defenses he may not have known he had however i would think a wide recruiting standard promoting the fact that it is unlikely a recruit will see battle is unwise as it would threaten to fill the ranks with soldiers who enlisted because they expected a cakewalk. This would certainly tend to make remaining members vulnerable and less safe.

    We could assume that training would change the mindset of those soldiers somewhat and in some cases maybe it would but I think an all volunteer force is vulnerable to a philosophy that encourages one to think they will not be involved in conflict. If this officer is concerned, which I'm sure he is and for the reasons I mention more than a political agenda, that would concern me.
    How can we as Americans explain this corporate advertising propensity towards peace as an anecdote to continued war?

    Psychoblues

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •