[quote]Michael C wrote:
It’s true that many men and women in the military come from ‘poor and un-educated’ families and communities. That is part of the allure of the military. But there are also many, and plenty of them enlisted, that have college credit or even degrees.
And then there are the officers. They are educated, and more often than not come from families of average to above average incomes (but let’s not throw out the fact that all officers are idiots and no-it-alls, I should know, I am one of them). I love The Ultimate Fighter series on Spike TV and whenever they play Shonie Carter’s famous knockout spinning backfist, I substitute you for Matt Serra, replaying in slow-mo your big grumbly ass flopping to the canvas.[/quote]
First, before anyone tries to get the wrong impression, I have nothing but respect for US (or Canadian for that matter) military personnel.
Second, of course there are rich or educated people in the military as well, particularly in officer territory. However, as most know, the military does still have more lower level personnel than brass.
Third, I don’t have a big grumbly ass, you may be thinking about yourself.
[quote]tme wrote:
Michael C wrote:
(but let’s not throw out the fact that all officers are idiots and no-it-alls, I should know, I am one of them).
They were when I was an NCO over 25 years ago, and I don’t think that will likely ever change. Looks like the minimum IQ for officers has been lowered substantially, though. Back in the day you had to at least get close to triple digits to qualify for OCS.
Third, I don’t have a big grumbly ass, you may be thinking about yourself.[/quote]
Ahhh, vroomy, you have an uncanny ability to put a smile on my face. Usually because I am envisioning dyeing your blonde goat-tee red with your own nose blood.
[quote]Michael C wrote:
Ahhh, vroomy, you have an uncanny ability to put a smile on my face. Usually because I am envisioning dyeing your blonde goat-tee red with your own nose blood.[/quote]
Prof, Prof, are you paying attention? I’d almost forgotten about this clown, but I have my own pseudo-stalker with some psycho fantasies to boot!
So, Michael, is that the best you can do? Act like a moronic Internet tough guy instead of actually discussing issues? Why don’t you try attacking the topic of discussion instead of offering your ongoing “threats” of violence?
[quote]vroom wrote:
Michael C wrote:
Ahhh, vroomy, you have an uncanny ability to put a smile on my face. Usually because I am envisioning dyeing your blonde goat-tee red with your own nose blood.
Prof, Prof, are you paying attention? I’d almost forgotten about this clown, but I have my own pseudo-stalker with some psycho fantasies to boot!
So, Michael, is that the best you can do? Act like a moronic Internet tough guy instead of actually discussing issues? Why don’t you try attacking the topic of discussion instead of offering your ongoing “threats” of violence?
What a fucking pathetic loser.[/quote]
Go get the book The Four Agreements by don Miguel Ruiz. I take none of your comments about me personally. Obviously, that is not the same case for you. Vroomy, relish in the fact that you are the ONLY t-nationer that I verbalize my want to smack around; THE ONLY ONE. You should be proud of that. I am a fffucking legend (and pathetic loser). Bow before Zod.
And bra, the Prof ain’t comin’ to your rescue on this one. If he does, I would be very surprised, as he is not a Mod nor has any desire to stand up for some crazy Canuck with such a beautiful face. But there I go, talking on someone else’s behalf.
And lover, I did contribute to your slack-jawed attempt at a thread bashing the Republicans. Sleep tight.
[quote]hedo wrote:
Great example of the Dems introducing Iraq into the Governor’s race in Calif. Does the Gov. of Calif have a lot to say about the action in Iraq. It was a speech. The media didn’t lead him into it.
It’s priceless you can’t make this stuff up. You can say you support the troops but eventually you can’t stay in character all the time and their true feelings slip out.
Kerry needed to have added:
“If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq fighting in a war I voted for.”
As to the poor and uneducated forming our military backbone only to be exploited by rich guys who vote for wars (like Senator Kerry):
"Middle-class youths, not the poor, are providing the bulk of wartime recruits to the armed forces, according to a new study by a conservative think tank.
The Heritage Foundation research paper found that a higher percentage of middle-class and upper-middle-class families have been providing enlistees for the war on Islamic militants since the September 11 attacks on the United States.
Researchers matched the ZIP codes of recruits over the past five years with federal government estimates of household incomes in those neighborhoods. Contrary to complaints from some liberal lawmakers and pundits, the data show that the poor are not shouldering the bulk of the military’s need for new soldiers, airmen, sailors and Marines.
The poorest neighborhoods provided 18 percent of recruits in prewar 1999 and 14.6 percent in 2003. By contrast, areas where household incomes ranged from $30,000 to $200,000 provided more than 85 percent.
“We found that recruits tend to come from middle-class areas, with disproportionately fewer from low-income areas,” said the report, prepared by Tim Kane, an Air Force Academy graduate and economics scholar. “Overall, the income distribution of military enlistees is more similar to than different from the income distribution of the general population.”
The debate was begun in 2002 by Rep. Charles B. Rangel, New York Democrat, as U.S. troops were fighting in Afghanistan and preparing for war in Iraq.
“A disproportionate number of the poor and members of minority groups make up the enlisted ranks of the military, while most privileged Americans are underrepresented or absent,” Mr. Rangel wrote in the New York Times. The lawmaker called on the Bush administration to reinstate compulsory service.
Mr. Rangel’s Washington office did not respond yesterday to the Heritage report.
The draft was discontinued in 1973, and the all-volunteer force eventually grew into what many national security officials see as the best-trained military force in history.
The Heritage report states that median household income for all enlisted recruits in 1999 was $41,141, compared with the national median of $41,994. By 2003, the recruit household income reached $42,822, when adjusted for inflation.
“In other words, on average, recruits in 2003 were from wealthier neighborhoods than were recruits in 1999,” said the report, titled, “Who Bears the Burden? Demographic Characteristics of U.S. Military Recruits Before and After 9/11.”
Mr. Kane said overall evidence “is at odds with the image, painted by some supporters of the draft, that the military exploits poor, ignorant young Americans by using slick advertising that promises technical careers in the military to dupe them into trading their feeble opportunities in the private sector for a meager role as cannon fodder.”
About 98 percent of all enlistees from 1999 to 2003 had a high school diploma, compared with 75 percent of nonrecruits nationwide.
“In an education context, rather than attracting underprivileged young Americans, the military seems to be attracting above-average Americans,” Mr. Kane wrote.
As for the military targeting non-urban recruits, it only makes sense - they have less work to do to get the ready.
And, as I have mentioned before, perhaps there is a noticeable absence of graduate students signing up to serve in the military. To which I add - how is that not a good thing? Who in the US wants our country defended by these fops running through a desert with an assault rifle?
This doesn’t apply to all seekers of higher education, of course, but my experience tells me that these types aren’t ill-suited to the armed forces because of their educational level, but rather their personality and character.
Thunder, the lower end of the middle class group is not “privileged”… it is, in fact, hard to tell from the material you have posted what is going on.
$30,000 - $200,000?
Break that down into ground pounders versus officers, and break it down by income range within the lower brackets, say $30,000 - $50,000 family income, education level and number of children.
[quote]Michael C wrote:
I take none of your comments about me personally.[/quote]
Sure, but I’m not the one throwing fantasies of violence at you.
It’s close to crossing the line dude, but I guess it’s better than having you roaming your neighborhood looking for more victims.
I can’t imagine he’d come to my defense, but he may take comfort in the fact he is not the only one that has Internet losers with strange obsessions following him around.