General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

US Starts Enlisting 14yrs old...

Started by Sonnenrad · · Last activity · 29 posts · 683 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
16 April 2005
Last activity
21 April 2005
Original author
Sonnenrad
Posts
29
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
683
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 29
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. In an effort to increase its ranks for coming wars, the U.S. military is
    recruiting - and paying - children as young as 14 years old for future
    combat duty.

    By Tim Schmitt

    Colin Hadley spends most of his days after school skateboarding or
    playing Halo II on his new X-Box with friends. He sleeps until noon or
    later on weekends and rarely, if ever, does any schoolwork outside the
    classroom, where he pulls down solid C's and a few D's - just enough to
    get by. He's the typical 15-year-old American boy: cocksure in demeanor,
    certain the world revolves around him, and confident that life is going
    to serve him well.

    And he's the new "target of interest" for U.S. military recruiters
    who've begun signing up boys as young as 14 for military service, which
    they will be required to begin when they turn 18.

    "It's a sweet deal," says Hadley, who boasts that he bought his X-Box
    with the enlistment bonus he received after signing up last month. "I
    don't have to do hardly anything for three years, but they're paying me
    now."

    Hadley's windfall was made possible under the Pentagon's "pre-enlistment
    program" that was quietly authorized last month in an effort to ensure
    the number of military troops available for combat remains steady for at
    least the next few years. The conditions of the program are simple. A
    young man who is at least 14 years old and has a parent's permission can
    enlist in the U.S. military, but will not report to duty until he
    reaches the legal age. The future soldier agrees to remain "physically
    and mentally fit" and to undergo annual physical examinations at the
    Military Entrance and Processing Station (MEPS). In exchange, the
    government provides him a $10,000 sign-on bonus that is paid in yearly
    installments of $2,500 until the age of 18, at which time any remaining
    balance is given to the recruit.

    And while waiting to report to duty at 18, the new recruits are paid a
    modest stipend and allowed access to funds granted veterans for
    education. Because combat duty is a requirement of enlistment, the
    program is currently open only to young men, and it has been authorized
    for only three years, so Congress will have to renew the program again
    in 2008.

    "The program is still in the early stages, but we're certain it will
    prove a valuable tool for the U.S. military while providing future
    soldiers with much-needed financial assistance so they can start
    planning for the future now," says Lt. James Pederson, a spokesman for
    the U.S. Pentagon's Office of Recruitment and Retention.

    With the war in Iraq still taking a toll, and potential conflicts on the
    horizon in Iran, North Korea, Syria, the Philippines and elsewhere, the
    U.S. military is faced with a shortage of manpower not seen in decades.

    The Army National Guard met only 56 percent of its recruiting quota in
    January, and the Marine Corps fell short of its recruiting goal that
    month for the first time since 1995. The Army missed its February
    recruiting goal by 27 percent, and the numbers for March and April are
    not expected to improve. And though the Bush administration has explored
    the idea of re-instituting the draft, the idea has been met with such
    widespread resistance that doing so seems unlikely.

    So the mighty U.S. military has been left with declining rolls during a
    time of war when the need for warm bodies is at a premium. The result
    has been a loosening of enlistment requirements and the offering of more
    incentives to fill the void.

    "More and more of our troops are choosing to leave service when their
    enlistment period comes to an end, and the number of new recruits
    entering military service is at a 20-year low," says Pederson. "We've
    had to become more and more creative in our efforts to fill the ranks of
    departing soldiers, and that's meant reaching out to new target groups
    and making them offers they simply can't refuse."

    Currently, the National Guard is offering enlistment bonuses of up to
    $15,000 for new members, who may also receive matching funds to be used
    as a down payment on a new home. In addition, the Army announced last
    week that it is raising the maximum age for new recruits by five years,
    up to 39. It has also increased by 33 percent the number of recruiters
    on the street and has developed a sales pitch to appeal to parents who
    otherwise might not approve of their child's enrollment

    "We're going to appeal to the patriotism of parents," says Pederson.
    "Parents have to understand that their children are needed in a time of
    war and that sacrifices need to be made for the good of the nation."

    Tom Hadley recognizes this need, and when he heard of the pre-enlistment
    program, convinced his son that it was in his best interest to sign up.

    "There aren't a lot of opportunities for poor or working class kids in
    this country right now, so this program is a blessing," says Tom. "Colin
    can spend the next couple years just being a kid and save a few bucks
    for school, and after his four years of military service he'll come out
    ahead. I'm proud of my son for making such a wise decision and standing
    up for his country."

    Carla Bloomer agrees with Tom that poor children have few options, but
    rankles at the suggestion that selling military service to a child is an
    answer to the problem. And she didn't even know this was an issue until
    she learned a recruiter had talked to her 14-year-old son and convinced
    him to sign up.

    "He's not smart enough to make a decision like that at this point in his
    life," she says. "That recruiter came in and played to his teenager's
    sense of invincibility and know-it-all attitude and convinced him this
    was the best thing for him to do. In the end, I had to give in and let
    him sign up."

    After he signed the paperwork, however, Bloomer took a closer look at
    the contract and was even more disturbed by what she learned. The small
    print reveals that the $350 monthly stipend her son receives is actually
    an advance on his $250 per month combat pay and $100 per month hardship
    duty pay.

    "What they've done is guarantee that my son will go to war when he's old
    enough," says Bloomer. "They're paying him for it now so he can't back
    out later."
    Her son, Richard, admits he wasn't aware of the source of the payments
    he's receiving, but adds that he's not worried about it either.

    "At least I'm getting paid now," he says. "Hell, I might get killed my
    first week out and then I'd get nothing. At least I can enjoy it now."

    But it may not be that simple. According to Pederson, the money paid out
    in the pre-enlistment program is an advance on pay, which will need to
    be paid back if the soldier is unable to serve in combat for any reason.

    "If a recruit is incapacitated or killed before two years of service
    have been completed, half of the funds paid to him pre-service will need
    to be returned to the U.S. government," he says. "That's still very
    generous, considering we could ask for reimbursement of funds for the
    entire period of incomplete service."

    But this provision has not sat well with some citizens who have
    petitioned the government to repeal this section. U.S. Rep. Dennis
    Caster introduced a bill in the last session that would make any
    repayment of the pre-paid funds strictly voluntary, but it never made it
    out of committee.

    And once these kids sign up under this program, they are committed to
    serving in a combat zone and face strict punishment if they refuse duty
    when they come of age. If any refuse to show up for duty they will be
    charged with desertion in a time of war and be subject to military court
    martial, which, theoretically at least, could result in the death penalty.

    "We expect our recruits of all ages to honor their commitment," says
    Pederson. "We are expending resources to guarantee their future service
    and will do whatever is necessary to make sure they live up to their
    pledge."

    The very concept of the pre-enlistment program is frightening to those
    who've spent years in active opposition to violence and militarization.
    Katherine Beck, Iowa coordinator for the National Peace and Justice
    Alliance (NPJA) for the past 15 years, says this program is indicative
    of the Bush administration's refusal to consider peaceful alternatives
    to war.

    "There is no question that this president wants to keep the country in a
    state of war, and there seems to be no one willing to stop him - not
    Congress, not the U.S. Senate, no one," she says. "We're now paying
    children - poor children mainly - to give up their childhood and commit
    to fighting, killing and, possibly, dying in future wars. That is
    nothing short of pure evil."

    But Pederson says the pre-enlistment program is really not that much of
    a change from recruitment methods that have been in place for the past
    few years. With passage of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002, the
    military was guaranteed access to the nation's public schools for
    recruiting purposes.

    According to the Office of Recruitment and Retention, the U.S. military
    was denied access to public schools on 19,228 occasions in 1999. But
    since the passage of No Child Left Behind, these schools have no choice
    but to let them in.

    "This allows us to send our professionals into schools to share
    information about the benefits of military service to young people, just
    as colleges and other businesses are allowed, encouraged even, to visit
    with students and do the same thing," says Pederson.

    But Karen Foss, the mother of a 14-year-old at Lincoln High School, says
    the intensity of the recruiting focused on her son took her by surprise.
    "I don't think most parents realize how much time and energy they
    (recruiters) spend on these kids," she says. "I was shocked when I found
    out that they were calling my son at home and visiting with him outside
    the classroom without my knowledge."

    And Foss is quick to point out that she comes from a family with a long
    history of military service (her grandfather was at Iwo Jima and her dad
    earned two purple hearts in Vietnam) and that she's a registered
    Republican who supported the war in Iraq.

    "This is just too much, though," she adds. "These are children they're
    after."
    Staff Sgt. Gary Lindell, an Army recruiter working out of the office on
    Army Post Road says it's common practice for recruiters to reach out to
    school-age kids wherever they can.

    "The initial meeting with kids in the schools is just the first step in
    a long process," says Lindell. "We take advantage of the access we've
    been granted to build a relationship with students and then build upon
    that."

    Lindell has taken small groups of students out for pizza and met with
    them over sodas and snacks at an area coffee shop frequented by teens.
    He uses these meetings to tell the kids about the advantages of military
    service.

    "It's important that they know they can make a real difference in the
    world," he says. "I tell them about the opportunity to travel, the
    chance to earn money for college, the medical benefits and the feeling
    of pride that comes with serving your country.

    "It's an important tool to reach these kids before they are influenced
    by outside forces who lack understanding of the U.S. military's
    worldwide goals," he adds. "These kids understand the need for a strong
    military and haven't had their thoughts corrupted by unpatriotic ideas."

    Foss' son, 14-year-old Tyler, and his best friend, 15-year-old Matthew
    Biehn, met with Lindell several times but declined to sign on despite
    the benefits Lindell told them about. Last month, Lindell arranged
    another meeting with the boys at a South Side coffee shop and brought
    along fellow recruiter Sgt. Lindsey Reas. After meeting with Reas
    several times Tyler decided to join the pre-enlistment program, and once
    he did, Biehn signed on as well.

    "I didn't even know the recruiter was talking to him until he told me he
    wanted to sign up," says Karen. "His father, whom I divorced several
    years ago, agreed to let Tyler join, so there was nothing I could do to
    stop him. I'm fairly confident that they brought a young woman recruiter
    in to close the deal with these boys. They're in the throes of puberty
    and would pretty much do whatever a pretty girl asks them to. I just
    don't think it's fair."

    Reas refused to entertain that notion and said the final incentive for
    these two boys came when she pointed out the number of comic books $350
    per month could buy. And in fact, when Tyler and Biehn agreed to discuss
    their enlistment, they arranged a meeting at a comic store where they
    promptly dropped more than $50 each for new releases.

    "They give us a lot of money for doing nothing," says Tyler. "If we have
    to go to war later, it won't be that bad anyway. She (Reas) gave us a
    copy of an Army video game that lets you see what it's really like. If
    you know what you're doing, you probably won't get hurt or killed."

    The game Tyler refers to is a free one available at www.goarmy.com that
    the army has developed as a recruiting tool. The site boasts that the
    game allows players to "Experience realistic training missions and see
    what it takes to become part of America's Army team." Local recruiters
    will also provide free copies of the game on CD to anyone interested,
    especially the young boys who generally play such games.

    Despite Karen's concerns, the recruiters are within their rights to talk
    to the kids without parental permission or knowledge. Section 9528 of
    the No Child Left Behind Act enables recruiters to gain personal
    information about students - home addresses, phone numbers,
    extracurricular activities - from school records. The only time parental
    involvement is required is when it comes time to sign the papers.

    "Yeah, we talk to the kids," says Lindell. "But it's not like we're
    kidnapping them and making them do this. They make an informed decision
    based on the facts we give them."

    In the short time the program has been in place, at least 10,763 young
    men aged 14-16 have joined the pre-enlistment program. Of those, at
    least 94 hail from Iowa, which boasts the second highest rate of
    participation (per-capita) in the nation, falling only behind Mississippi.

    These new recruits have begun chatting on the Internet and sharing
    thoughts on their upcoming service on message boards and have started an
    informal organization of members called VFW - Veterans of Future Wars.

    It's an accurate title, too. Pederson says these new recruits will be
    required, after completing boot camp and two weeks of additional
    training, to serve in combat zones. The very nature of the war on
    terror, he explains, ensures that the United States will be in a state
    of armed conflict with some enemy or another for many years to come.

    "We will most definitely be at war with someone for the next decade, at
    least," he says. "And our recruitment programs are an effort to ensure
    the safety of all American citizens and to protect the American way of
    life."

    Beck, director of the NPJA, disagrees, and says this is indicative that
    we as a country have reached a level and acceptance of war that may be
    difficult to turn away from.

    "That parents are allowing and encouraging their children to sign up
    under this program is troubling and shows a real lack of understanding
    of what's happening in the world," she says. "By committing our children
    to wage war, we are committing our society to a path of violence and
    oppression and militarism that will be impossible to sustain and that
    will further alienate us from the rest of the world."

    Still, Pederson says the program is a necessary step.

    "Is it unfortunate that we have to recruit children to serve in battle?
    Absolutely," he says. "But most countries have had children soldiering
    for centuries. We're just leveling the playing field." PB

  2. "Sonnenrad" <zse@wdv> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    In an effort to increase its ranks for coming wars, the U.S. military is
    recruiting - and paying - children as young as 14 years old for future
    combat duty.

    By Tim Schmitt

    Colin Hadley spends most of his days after school skateboarding or
    playing Halo II on his new X-Box with friends. He sleeps until noon or
    later on weekends and rarely, if ever, does any schoolwork outside the
    classroom, where he pulls down solid C's and a few D's - just enough to
    get by. He's the typical 15-year-old American boy: cocksure in demeanor,
    certain the world revolves around him, and confident that life is going
    to serve him well.

    Sorry - I'm not familiar with your posting.

    Are you trolling, or is this a satire?

    Art

  3. "Usenet Posting" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 17:40:45 GMT, "Art S" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    "Sonnenrad" <zse@wdv> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    In an effort to increase its ranks for coming wars, the U.S. military is
    recruiting - and paying - children as young as 14 years old for future
    combat duty.

    By Tim Schmitt

    Colin Hadley spends most of his days after school skateboarding or
    playing Halo II on his new X-Box with friends. He sleeps until noon or
    later on weekends and rarely, if ever, does any schoolwork outside the
    classroom, where he pulls down solid C's and a few D's - just enough to
    get by. He's the typical 15-year-old American boy: cocksure in demeanor,
    certain the world revolves around him, and confident that life is going
    to serve him well.

    Sorry - I'm not familiar with your posting.

    Are you trolling, or is this a satire?

    Art

    Has to be a joke. Reasonably well written though.

    Google found the original at http://www.dmcityview.com/, which
    purports to be an alternative news paper. It had enough broken links,
    no archives (that I could find), etc. so that it (the web site) could be a
    joke as opposed to just the article.

    I found it too long, to be honest. I lost interest after a few paragraphs
    and just skipped through the rest.

    Art

  4. [[censored] deleted]

    This is a pretty well written but unrealistic joke. I went through basic
    when I was 17 and was considered some sort of oddity. I was pulled aside
    and specifically asked if I was running away from home or something.
    I had just graduated high school before I turned 18 and was looking to
    do something different for a little while.
    While that was a long time ago I doubt the military is any different.
    They want healthy well adjusted people, not misfits.
    Also, one really clear sign that the article is [censored] is that there
    purports to be some stipulation of combat. Absolutely impossible.
    Honestly, the military isn't that well organized to say with any degree
    of certainty what sort of duty anybody will ever pull. Especially 4
    years out? What "combat" is there to be in, say, 4 years? Nobody knows
    what is going to happen tomorrow much less in 4 years.(under president
    Mitt Romney, mark my words!!) No, this reveals a cynical and ignorant
    worldview of the author.
    Whomever wrote this is a decent faker of a journalistic sounding story
    but is fairly ignorant of how the military really works?

  5. On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 18:37:36 GMT, The Gist <[email hidden]> wrote
    in misc.fitness.weights:

    Quoted message said:

    [[censored] deleted]

    This is a pretty well written but unrealistic joke. I went through basic
    when I was 17 and was considered some sort of oddity. I was pulled aside
    and specifically asked if I was running away from home or something.
    I had just graduated high school before I turned 18 and was looking to
    do something different for a little while.
    While that was a long time ago I doubt the military is any different.
    They want healthy well adjusted people, not misfits.
    Also, one really clear sign that the article is [censored] is that there
    purports to be some stipulation of combat. Absolutely impossible.
    Honestly, the military isn't that well organized to say with any degree
    of certainty what sort of duty anybody will ever pull. Especially 4
    years out? What "combat" is there to be in, say, 4 years? Nobody knows
    what is going to happen tomorrow much less in 4 years.(under president
    Mitt Romney, mark my words!!) No, this reveals a cynical and ignorant
    worldview of the author.
    Whomever wrote this is a decent faker of a journalistic sounding story
    but is fairly ignorant of how the military really works?

    I read a book where (to the best of my recollection as it was a long
    time ago) the author described his experience as a marine in Viet Nam.
    Or perhaps it was the book, "Friendly Fire" which was actually written
    by the mother (I believe Carol Burnett played her in the
    movie...didn't see it though.) of a serviceman who was killed in Viet
    Nam. In the book, the author spoke of a group of 17 year old marines
    who were stationed in Hawaii. Their job was to train for combat until
    they reached the age of 18 when they were shipped off to a front line
    unit in Viet Nam. Apparently the Marine Corps didn't like the
    publicity of 17 year olds getting killed in action.

  6. Art S schrieb:

    Quoted message said:

    "Usenet Posting" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 17:40:45 GMT, "Art S" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    "Sonnenrad" <zse@wdv> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

    >In an effort to increase its ranks for coming wars, the U.S. military is
    >recruiting - and paying - children as young as 14 years old for future
    >combat duty.
    >
    >By Tim Schmitt
    >
    >Colin Hadley spends most of his days after school skateboarding or
    >playing Halo II on his new X-Box with friends. He sleeps until noon or
    >later on weekends and rarely, if ever, does any schoolwork outside the
    >classroom, where he pulls down solid C's and a few D's - just enough to
    >get by. He's the typical 15-year-old American boy: cocksure in demeanor,
    >certain the world revolves around him, and confident that life is going
    >to serve him well.

    Sorry - I'm not familiar with your posting.

    Are you trolling, or is this a satire?

    Art

    Has to be a joke. Reasonably well written though.

    Google found the original at http://www.dmcityview.com/, which
    purports to be an alternative news paper. It had enough broken links,
    no archives (that I could find), etc. so that it (the web site) could be a
    joke as opposed to just the article.

    I found it too long, to be honest. I lost interest after a few paragraphs
    and just skipped through the rest.

    Art


    well the gist of it is that the army pays 14yrs old 10 000 buck but they
    MUST then become COMBAT soldier when they turn 18. The sweet part is
    that this 10 000 buck is not a grant but a LOAN!!!

  7. "Sonnenrad" <zse@wdv> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Art S schrieb:

    Quoted message said:

    "Usenet Posting" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 17:40:45 GMT, "Art S" <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    >"Sonnenrad" <zse@wdv> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
    >
    >>In an effort to increase its ranks for coming wars, the U.S. military is
    >>recruiting - and paying - children as young as 14 years old for future
    >>combat duty.
    >>
    >>By Tim Schmitt
    >>
    >>Colin Hadley spends most of his days after school skateboarding or
    >>playing Halo II on his new X-Box with friends. He sleeps until noon or
    >>later on weekends and rarely, if ever, does any schoolwork outside the
    >>classroom, where he pulls down solid C's and a few D's - just enough to
    >>get by. He's the typical 15-year-old American boy: cocksure in demeanor,
    >>certain the world revolves around him, and confident that life is going
    >>to serve him well.
    >
    >Sorry - I'm not familiar with your posting.
    >
    >Are you trolling, or is this a satire?
    >
    >Art
    >
    >

    Has to be a joke. Reasonably well written though.

    Google found the original at http://www.dmcityview.com/, which
    purports to be an alternative news paper. It had enough broken links,
    no archives (that I could find), etc. so that it (the web site) could be a
    joke as opposed to just the article.

    I found it too long, to be honest. I lost interest after a few paragraphs
    and just skipped through the rest.

    Art


    well the gist of it is that the army pays 14yrs old 10 000 buck but they
    MUST then become COMBAT soldier when they turn 18. The sweet part is
    that this 10 000 buck is not a grant but a LOAN!!!

    Oh, I read that.

    I just don't believe it. (A 14 year old can't be held responsible for signing
    a contract, by the way, so it couldn't be enforced.)

    That's why I was wondering if you were trolling or posting it because it
    is humorous.

    Art

  8. "Art S" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    "Sonnenrad" <zse@wdv> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    Art S schrieb:

    Quoted message said:

    "Usenet Posting" <[email hidden]> wrote
    > "Art S" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    >>"Sonnenrad" <zse@wdv> wrote
    >>>In an effort to increase its ranks for coming wars, the U.S. military
    >>>is
    >>>recruiting - and paying - children as young as 14 years old for
    >>>future
    >>>combat duty.
    >>>
    >>>By Tim Schmitt
    >>>
    >>>Colin Hadley spends most of his days after school skateboarding or
    >>>playing Halo II on his new X-Box with friends. He sleeps until noon
    >>>or
    >>>later on weekends and rarely, if ever, does any schoolwork outside
    >>>the
    >>>classroom, where he pulls down solid C's and a few D's - just enough
    >>>to
    >>>get by. He's the typical 15-year-old American boy: cocksure in
    >>>demeanor,
    >>>certain the world revolves around him, and confident that life is
    >>>going
    >>>to serve him well.
    >>
    >>Sorry - I'm not familiar with your posting.
    >>
    >>Are you trolling, or is this a satire?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Has to be a joke. Reasonably well written though.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Google found the original at http://www.dmcityview.com/, which
    purports to be an alternative news paper. It had enough broken links,
    no archives (that I could find), etc. so that it (the web site) could
    be a
    joke as opposed to just the article.

    I found it too long, to be honest. I lost interest after a few
    paragraphs
    and just skipped through the rest.


    well the gist of it is that the army pays 14yrs old 10 000 buck but they
    MUST then become COMBAT soldier when they turn 18. The sweet part is
    that this 10 000 buck is not a grant but a LOAN!!!

    Oh, I read that.

    I just don't believe it. (A 14 year old can't be held responsible for
    signing
    a contract, by the way, so it couldn't be enforced.)

    That's why I was wondering if you were trolling or posting it because it
    is humorous.

    Either way, it will be blamed on the Jews.

    David

  9. Sonnenrad said:

    In an effort to increase its ranks for
    coming wars, the U.S. military is
    recruiting - and paying - children as
    young as 14 years old for future
    combat duty.

    By Tim Schmitt


    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    U.S. Rep. Dennis Caster introduced a bill [snip]

    Hoax. (Caster could be a state level representative, but he's not
    federal.) But, unfortunately, not so divorced from reality.

    The No Child Left Behind Act, Section 9528, requires schools to grant
    military recruiters access to student information and to school grounds
    and activities:

    "(1) ACCESS TO STUDENT RECRUITING INFORMATION.-Notwithstanding section
    444(a)(5)(B) of the General Education Provisions Act and except as
    provided in paragraph (2), each local educational agency receiving
    assistance under this Act shall provide, on a request made by military
    recruiters or an institution of higher education, access to secondary
    school students names, addresses, and telephone listings."

    http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg112.html#sec9528

    Lots of 14-year-old ninth graders out there, so recruiters certainly
    will be talking with them given the opportunity which Section 9528
    clearly spells out.

    --
    Curt
    http://curtjames.com/

  10. David Cohen schrieb:

    Quoted message said:

    "Art S" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    "Sonnenrad" <zse@wdv> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    Art S schrieb:

    >"Usenet Posting" <[email hidden]> wrote
    >
    >>"Art S" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    >>
    >>>"Sonnenrad" <zse@wdv> wrote
    >>>
    >>>>In an effort to increase its ranks for coming wars, the U.S. military
    >>>>is
    >>>>recruiting - and paying - children as young as 14 years old for
    >>>>future
    >>>>combat duty.
    >>>>
    >>>>By Tim Schmitt
    >>>>
    >>>>Colin Hadley spends most of his days after school skateboarding or
    >>>>playing Halo II on his new X-Box with friends. He sleeps until noon
    >>>>or
    >>>>later on weekends and rarely, if ever, does any schoolwork outside
    >>>>the
    >>>>classroom, where he pulls down solid C's and a few D's - just enough
    >>>>to
    >>>>get by. He's the typical 15-year-old American boy: cocksure in
    >>>>demeanor,
    >>>>certain the world revolves around him, and confident that life is
    >>>>going
    >>>>to serve him well.
    >>>
    >>>Sorry - I'm not familiar with your posting.
    >>>
    >>>Are you trolling, or is this a satire?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >>Has to be a joke. Reasonably well written though.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Google found the original at http://www.dmcityview.com/, which
    >purports to be an alternative news paper. It had enough broken links,
    >no archives (that I could find), etc. so that it (the web site) could
    >be a
    >joke as opposed to just the article.
    >
    >I found it too long, to be honest. I lost interest after a few
    >paragraphs
    >and just skipped through the rest.
    >

    well the gist of it is that the army pays 14yrs old 10 000 buck but they
    MUST then become COMBAT soldier when they turn 18. The sweet part is
    that this 10 000 buck is not a grant but a LOAN!!!

    Oh, I read that.

    I just don't believe it. (A 14 year old can't be held responsible for
    signing
    a contract, by the way, so it couldn't be enforced.)

    That's why I was wondering if you were trolling or posting it because it
    is humorous.

    Either way, it will be blamed on the Jews.

    David


    Personally, I blame the Mbutsi pygmies of Congo

  11. Curt James said:
    Sonnenrad said:

    In an effort to increase its ranks for
    coming wars, the U.S. military is
    recruiting - and paying - children as
    young as 14 years old for future
    combat duty.

    By Tim Schmitt


    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    U.S. Rep. Dennis Caster introduced a bill [snip]

    Hoax. (Caster could be a state level representative, but he's not
    federal.) But, unfortunately, not so divorced from reality.

    The No Child Left Behind Act, Section 9528, requires schools to grant
    military recruiters access to student information and to school grounds
    and activities:

    "(1) ACCESS TO STUDENT RECRUITING INFORMATION.-Notwithstanding section
    444(a)(5)(B) of the General Education Provisions Act and except as
    provided in paragraph (2), each local educational agency receiving
    assistance under this Act shall provide, on a request made by military
    recruiters or an institution of higher education, access to secondary
    school students names, addresses, and telephone listings."

    http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg112.html#sec9528

    Lots of 14-year-old ninth graders out there, so recruiters certainly
    will be talking with them given the opportunity which Section 9528
    clearly spells out.

    Of course, the key to that access is the federal funding for which all
    the schools are clamoring.

    Everything has its price.
    --

    JMW
    http://www.rustyiron.net

  12. JMW said:
    Curt James said:

    The No Child Left Behind Act, Section 9528,


    [snip]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    under this Act shall provide, on a request
    made by military recruiters or an institution
    of higher education, access to secondary
    school students names, addresses, and telephone listings."

    http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg112.html#sec9528


    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    Of course, the key to that access is the federal
    funding for which all the schools are clamoring.

    Everything has its price.

    True. Still, some districts simply told the feds to keep their money.

    http://www.susanohanian.org/show_nclb_news.html?id=236
    or
    http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1125/p10s02-legn.html

    And, if you're truly bored out of your skull, then see why NCLB is not
    favored by everyone:

    http://www.fairfieldweekly.com/gbase/News/content.html?oid=oid:56286

    Old news, yes, but it all still applies to too many classrooms.

    --
    Curt
    http://curtjames.com/

  13. "Usenet Posting" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:
    David Cohen said:
    Quoted message said:

    That's why I was wondering if you were trolling or posting it because it
    is humorous.

    Either way, it will be blamed on the Jews.


    If they would only give up Gaza and the West Bank all would be right
    with the world. Note, there may also be required land givebacks
    north, south, east and west of these territories.

    Seems fair.

    David

  14. In article said:

    In an effort to increase its ranks for coming wars, the U.S. military is
    recruiting - and paying - children as young as 14 years old for future
    combat duty.

    By Tim Schmitt

    Colin Hadley spends most of his days after school skateboarding or
    playing Halo II on his new X-Box with friends. He sleeps until noon or
    later on weekends and rarely, if ever, does any schoolwork outside the
    classroom, where he pulls down solid C's and a few D's - just enough to
    get by.

    Which is a pretty poor statement about parents today. No kid of mine
    would get away with that BS.

    --
    Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

  15. John Hanson said:

    On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 18:37:36 GMT, The Gist <[email hidden]> wrote
    in misc.fitness.weights:

    Quoted message said:

    [[censored] deleted]

    This is a pretty well written but unrealistic joke. I went through basic
    when I was 17 and was considered some sort of oddity. I was pulled aside
    and specifically asked if I was running away from home or something.
    I had just graduated high school before I turned 18 and was looking to
    do something different for a little while.
    While that was a long time ago I doubt the military is any different.
    They want healthy well adjusted people, not misfits.
    Also, one really clear sign that the article is [censored] is that there
    purports to be some stipulation of combat. Absolutely impossible.
    Honestly, the military isn't that well organized to say with any degree
    of certainty what sort of duty anybody will ever pull. Especially 4
    years out? What "combat" is there to be in, say, 4 years? Nobody knows
    what is going to happen tomorrow much less in 4 years.(under president
    Mitt Romney, mark my words!!) No, this reveals a cynical and ignorant
    worldview of the author.
    Whomever wrote this is a decent faker of a journalistic sounding story
    but is fairly ignorant of how the military really works?

    I read a book where (to the best of my recollection as it was a long
    time ago) the author described his experience as a marine in Viet Nam.
    Or perhaps it was the book, "Friendly Fire" which was actually written
    by the mother (I believe Carol Burnett played her in the
    movie...didn't see it though.) of a serviceman who was killed in Viet
    Nam. In the book, the author spoke of a group of 17 year old marines
    who were stationed in Hawaii. Their job was to train for combat until
    they reached the age of 18 when they were shipped off to a front line
    unit in Viet Nam. Apparently the Marine Corps didn't like the
    publicity of 17 year olds getting killed in action.

    More training can't be a bad thing. Probably increased their
    effectiveness and survival rate.

    -----------
    Proton Soup

    "And all this peace has been deceiving,
    I need some wind to get me sailing"

  16. JMW said:
    Curt James said:
    Sonnenrad said:

    In an effort to increase its ranks for
    coming wars, the U.S. military is
    recruiting - and paying - children as
    young as 14 years old for future
    combat duty.

    By Tim Schmitt


    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    U.S. Rep. Dennis Caster introduced a bill [snip]

    Hoax. (Caster could be a state level representative, but he's not
    federal.) But, unfortunately, not so divorced from reality.

    The No Child Left Behind Act, Section 9528, requires schools to grant
    military recruiters access to student information and to school grounds
    and activities:

    "(1) ACCESS TO STUDENT RECRUITING INFORMATION.-Notwithstanding section
    444(a)(5)(B) of the General Education Provisions Act and except as
    provided in paragraph (2), each local educational agency receiving
    assistance under this Act shall provide, on a request made by military
    recruiters or an institution of higher education, access to secondary
    school students names, addresses, and telephone listings."

    http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg112.html#sec9528

    Lots of 14-year-old ninth graders out there, so recruiters certainly
    will be talking with them given the opportunity which Section 9528
    clearly spells out.

    Of course, the key to that access is the federal funding for which all
    the schools are clamoring.

    Everything has its price.

    But not everything should be for sale.

    Still, I remember being forced to take the ASVAB in HS. That was 20
    years ago. I don't see how things have changed much since then.

    -----------
    Proton Soup

    "And all this peace has been deceiving,
    I need some wind to get me sailing"

  17. "Curt James" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Sonnenrad said:

    In an effort to increase its ranks for
    coming wars, the U.S. military is
    recruiting - and paying - children as
    young as 14 years old for future
    combat duty.

    By Tim Schmitt


    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    U.S. Rep. Dennis Caster introduced a bill [snip]

    Hoax. (Caster could be a state level representative, but he's not
    federal.) But, unfortunately, not so divorced from reality.

    The No Child Left Behind Act, Section 9528, requires schools to grant
    military recruiters access to student information and to school grounds
    and activities:

    "(1) ACCESS TO STUDENT RECRUITING INFORMATION.-Notwithstanding section
    444(a)(5)(B) of the General Education Provisions Act and except as
    provided in paragraph (2), each local educational agency receiving
    assistance under this Act shall provide, on a request made by military
    recruiters or an institution of higher education, access to secondary
    school students names, addresses, and telephone listings."

    http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg112.html#sec9528

    Lots of 14-year-old ninth graders out there, so recruiters certainly
    will be talking with them given the opportunity which Section 9528
    clearly spells out.

    --
    Curt
    http://curtjames.com/

    And why shouldn't they?

  18. ATP* wrote:

    re military recruiters being allowed access to children by No Child
    Left Behind Act, Section 9528

    Quoted message said:

    And why shouldn't they?

    Quoted message said:

    From the perspective of introducing students to service members and the


    military in general and from a historical/pride in one's country point
    of view, no problem.

    Quoted message said:

    From the perspective of aggressively recruiting future members of


    combat forces, BIG problem.

    I don't believe a child should be recruited at age 14. Introduced to an
    active duty member, sure, but not actively recruited. I also don't
    believe even a 17-year-old should speak to a recruiter for the purposes
    of entering a delayed entry program without a parent or guardian
    accompanying them.

    Have you served in the military? I have and I'm proud of my service and
    my honorable discharge after five years. Have you ever been recruited?
    I first spoke with a Marine recruiter at age 17. Those guys are in it
    to win it and if current recruiters are of the same mindset then Lord
    help any child who speaks to one.

    --
    Curt
    http://curtjames.com/

  19. Quoted message said:


    Which is a pretty poor statement about parents today. No kid of mine
    would get away with that BS.

    Is it reasonable to assume that most of these new recruits (the
    kiddies) are not from white bred suburbia but more likely from the hood
    where their life expectancy is about 20 years old anyway ?? Dead is
    dead...whether it be at the hands of a gang banger or insurgent...might
    as well get paid for it.

  20. "Curt James" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    ATP* wrote:

    re military recruiters being allowed access to children by No Child
    Left Behind Act, Section 9528

    Quoted message said:

    And why shouldn't they?

    Quoted message said:

    From the perspective of introducing students to service members and the


    military in general and from a historical/pride in one's country point
    of view, no problem.

    Quoted message said:

    From the perspective of aggressively recruiting future members of


    combat forces, BIG problem.

    I don't believe a child should be recruited at age 14. Introduced to an
    active duty member, sure, but not actively recruited. I also don't
    believe even a 17-year-old should speak to a recruiter for the purposes
    of entering a delayed entry program without a parent or guardian
    accompanying them.

    Have you served in the military? I have and I'm proud of my service and
    my honorable discharge after five years. Have you ever been recruited?
    I first spoke with a Marine recruiter at age 17. Those guys are in it
    to win it and if current recruiters are of the same mindset then Lord
    help any child who speaks to one.

    --
    Curt

    I don't believe there is any delayed entry program.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.