Posted on 05/25/2008 12:45:27 PM PDT by The_Republican
For the American Left, there are many reasons to withdraw from Iraq: we're caught in the middle of a sectarian civil war, the Iraqi government is a perfidious ally, Iraq is a diversion from the real war against al Qaeda in Afghanistan, and so on. Some of these arguments are strategically shortsighted, others are based on false premises (such as the fact that the sectarian civil war is over in Iraq and bin Laden is in Pakistan, not Afghanistan), but at least they are more or less logically coherent. What makes almost no sense is the proposal that we turn success in Iraq into defeat so that we can "fix the military."
Fixing the "broken" military is a reliable campaign talking point for both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama; the Democrats have embraced the idea that soldiers are a new constituency in their Coalition of the Victimized. Obama's victory speech after the South Carolina primary in January grouped soldiers and their families with "the mother who can't get Medicaid for her sick child," the "teacher who works another shift at Dunkin Donuts" and the "Maytag worker who is now competing with his own teenager for a $7-an-hour job at Walmart."
The fix-the-military argument was recently made at greater length by the New York Times. On May 18, the paper's editorialists noted that the efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken a serious toll on the Army and Marine Corps, wearing down not only people but equipment "at an unprecedented rate." Well, the loss rates would not have been surprising to the defenders of Bastogne, the armies at Antietam, or the servicemen and women in any other major war, but it is true that US land forces have been asked to do too much with too little for too long.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
LOL!
Yeah...facts like the fact that they've lowered the standards, giving loads of waivers for felons to join, and they're now giving record-level bounties to keep and recruit people.
Substantiated facts, admitted by the military, and covered in papers they have released, wherein they have stated the deleterious effects on the military that such actions would have.
Facts like how the US Army has gone from 6 percent non-high-school-grads in 2003 to 16.5 percent in 2005 to nearly 30 percent in 2007? That's going from 1 in 17 to about one-third!!
How about how the DoD information shows that just since 2004, the Army is signing up more than one-fourth fewer ‘high-quality’ recruits?
How about how the same info shows that they are now accepting about 7 times as many of the lowest quality recruits (Category IV) than in 2004? They've twice had to raise the allowable percentage of the low-aptitude recruits in order to get enough bodies.
Misleading the American people about how rough these deployments are on the service personnel, their families, and recruitment, is just not fair to any involved.
Have we (USA) ever fought a war and didn’t reduce the military admission standards?
Not to throw a smoke screen or disagree (I don’t) but I wonder if a lot of those dropouts are higher aptitude but low achieving boys. I see an awful lot of boys dropping out of High School who just can’t stand what it has become. I wonder if the military is giving them somewhere constructive to go. If this is the case, we are not in quite as bad a shape. The military becoming, in effect, a substitute for High School.
You make perfectly valid points in your post that are untouchable by the PC crowd & LSM, else their facade of equality would crumble.
Well, Red, they are gonna stay, and they know that what you say is from the heart and from love of country.
Long ago US service personnel realized that they would always be sacrificed by any politician that found it convenient to do so for votes or agenda. They know that they will ALWAYS be called upon to sacrifice in a rear guard action to keep the enemy at bay while the entire nation led by leftists, retreats rather than fights. They are used to it.
The modern US military are the core of the love America crowd, and and the most high performance individuals the world has ever seen. This is the first reason the leftist socialists hate them so much. The second is because our military happens to kill socialist and fascist tyrants where ever they go, positions coveted by leftists and cowards.
The military is staying put, it's not a matter of duty, it's a matter of love.
We all know that what you say is true. God, bless our incredible and brave military; those that are gone and those that serve now. We, civilians, who love our nation just as much, must fight our enemies here at home. We must expose the lies and deceptions of politicians. We must ensure that the the motivations of our internal enemies are made public.
Actually, that's why I also presented the "Category IV" ratings... which shows recruits scoring as low as 10th percentile in aptitude. Those rates are at 7 times what they were only a few years ago.
I know that it's not Politically Correct to mention these things on FR, else the flag-waving Ostrich Brigade comes out in force, but for those of us who care about America, the military, and reality, these points are important. (I'm flag-waving, but not an Ostrich! :-)
Note that the DoD itself has admitted there's a problem. Some months, they have had DOUBLE-DIGIT rates of Category IV recruiting...when the limit was supposed to be only 2 percent. Note that a study for the Pentagon found that "[r]eplacing a tank gunner who had scored Category IV with one who'd scored Category IIIA (in the 50th to 64th percentile) improved the chances of hitting a target by 34 percent." (Why dumb recruits cost the Army, big-time)
see also Dumb and Dumber The U.S. Army lowers recruitment standards … again and Military Recruiting 2007: Army Misses Benchmarks by Greater Margin
You do realize that we've been in Iraq and Afghanistan for years, and Europe and Korea for decades, right? In other words, it has already occurred.
We were doing that when I was in (VN era).
At that time, they were classed as Categories 1,2 & 3.
There might have been a four or five, but the AF was limited to 3 as the lowest if memory serves me correctly.
You, FR and the conservative new media are doing a fine job of that right here, right now.
Consider the public approval rating of the US Congress, you're doin' your job.
But the initial idea, that of Sharnasky's Democratic Imperative, HAS to be tried, otherwise it's Load up the Big Ones and Drop them. It may come to that yet, as you've stated.
But I believe, based on Michael Yon's and others' writing on this war, that we have reaped a silo of good will from ordinary Iraqis, that will be the sustenance of the means of changing the dynamics in the ME.
Oh, that and the turning away from the ROP/sarc that has been reported to be occuring in waves throughout the ME.
It will be a Long War and a Long Struggle, but to borrow that cliche, Rome wasn't built in a Day.
Much truth in what you have stated. The high school drop-outs that I know are not low aptitide, but couldn't stand the high school culture, or had family problems.
I have maintianed for many years, that the serious gang problems in this country began when we abolished the Draft. I am not arguing for it now, but I would make the argument that it gave a lot of young men in marginal stuations the gateway to self-discipline and skills that they would have otherwise been denied. This has been especially noted for young black men: those who served in the military post WWII had a path out of the inner cities.
This is worrying.
Bush wasted the Golden Opportunity for rebuilding the military immediately following 9/11. The national support was there and the willing recruits were being turned away.
The downturns began under Poppy, continued under Clinton even with six of his eight years facing a GOP majority in both houses. They did nothing to stop it.
Bush and today's Congress is running two wars on 1996 End Troop Strength Numbers and equipment replacements for war losses and wore out equipment are slow coming because Bush and congress have higher priorities for the money to go to. I understand we can't have the strength we had under Reagan but about 60% would be nice. We also need to end Army National Guard call ups for foreign deployments as well as most reserve call ups. Use them to fill active duty domestic billets if they are absolutely needed. I want to see our military needs being met made top priority by POTUS and congress alike as it should be. Todays political climate in both the DEM and GOP no where near approaches such.
Well, I agree, and I'll raise you to "the confirmed existence of American Exceptionalism".
I pretty much put the existence of American exceptionalism in the same drawer as the existence of gravity, except American exceptionalism is easier to see, the evidence is everywhere.
The problem we have is that the Goebbels propaganda technique works so well, the leftist MSM can find nothing good to say about America, and nothing bad to say about socialist and themselves.
Are we nation building? Yes, because we have to, it's the only long term fix.
Did Bush always intend to nation build? No, he would have preferred to run a peacetime nation, but it's the only fix that isn't a patch that will fail in the future.
Has Bush been too easy on the enemies of America? Yes, but it's hard to really get tough on a group that contains so many Democrats.
Can Bush communicate any of this to the American people? Not very well, and most other republicans are no better, thus the Goebbels MSM/DBM has their say,... endlessly.
Yes...it is an experiment. As was the Marshall Plan.
Yup, I am a Mac snob proudly!
Red you are so right! I believe it will come to this.. I don't believe McCain can win, the Pubs are too divided especially where I live in ILLINOIS, and the dems here are true died in the wool Obama sheeple. they will follow him off a cliff, until he has to sign on to the draft, then they will all hate the b-----d!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.