What's new
By:

Army Sucides highest in 20 years

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cosworth
  • Start date Start date
Gilding the Lily said:
Thanks for the links, Redbird. Not only do they provide insightful information, they both show that my statement of "many of those that join are from certain places in the South" was, indeed, correct.

The relevant part of the first link: in 1999, 42.2% of enlisted recruits were from the South and in 2003, 41.1% of enlisted recruits were from the South.

The relevant part of the second link: "The South is overrepresented among military recruits."
Click to expand...

I will concede the point but you left out the following comments in that paragraph which said that Montana, Alaska, Wyoming and Maine, hardly "southern states", had much higher than proportional rates. The south has long had a history of military service, something also that the study mentions when it writes there was an exceptional tendency for lower than average military service.

It also states
Due to the lack of comparable data for other years, it is unclear whether this movement is signif­icant or even suggestive of a pattern. However, states with the most positive upward movement in their enlistment ratios after the war on terrorism began were Iowa (+0.21), Wisconsin (+0.17), Kan­sas (+0.16), Washington (+0.15), and Arizona (+0.14).
Click to expand...
again, hardly southern states.

This chart ( http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalS...a05-08_fig5.gif ) at first glance appears to show that those states that lean toward the Republican party have a higher enlistment rate while those under the Democrat tent show a lower enlistment rate.

I guess I have to fall back on your initial assertion which, possibly poorly phrased, seemed to imfer that the uneducated made up the mass of recruits as one does not normally (rightly or wrongly) associate the terms "south" and "Detroit" as institutes of higher learning... much like one often (rightly or wrongly) associates parts of the northeast as homes to the effete' consumed with intellectual snobbery.

I just could be wrong...
 
Redbird said:
I will concede the point but you left out the following comments in that paragraph which said that Montana, Alaska, Wyoming and Maine, hardly "southern states", had much higher than proportional rates. The south has long had a history of military service, something also that the study mentions when it writes there was an exceptional tendency for lower than average military service.

It also states again, hardly southern states.

This chart ( http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalS...a05-08_fig5.gif ) at first glance appears to show that those states that lean toward the Republican party have a higher enlistment rate while those under the Democrat tent show a lower enlistment rate.

I guess I have to fall back on your initial assertion which, possibly poorly phrased, seemed to imfer that the uneducated made up the mass of recruits as one does not normally (rightly or wrongly) associate the terms "south" and "Detroit" as institutes of higher learning... much like one often (rightly or wrongly) associates parts of the northeast as homes to the effete' consumed with intellectual snobbery.

I just could be wrong...
Click to expand...

Thanks for recognizing your error. The fact that certain states enlist a greater percentage of their youngsters in the military is very interesting. I purposefully left that paragraph out because, while interesting, is doesn't detract from the fact that the nearly half of new recruits are from the south. Perhaps so many recruits come from the south because of the "tradition" of military service within families... you seem to elude to that in your post, and most certainly with the link you posted.

As for the republican party possibly enlisting more recruits than dems... I don't know whether the chart suggests that (I will take you at you word), but it definitely would not suprise me if that were true.

Please do fall back on my initial assertion, which was:
Gilding the Lily said:
Many of those that join are from certain places in the South or places like Detroit. Of those, many will explain that they joined because their exit opportunities are better than if they tried to get a job straight from HS (if they completed) or to pay for future schooling.

I do no mention this to belittle our military (I recognize that many people join the military from great colleges/careers, and also, that great soldiers do not necessarily need to be well-educated). But I do mention it to illustrate that for many soldiers, their intentions in joining the military are quite different from those of the WWII era soldiers (at the very least, the priorities for joining are vastly different).
Click to expand...

It was not poorly phrased; I intended to state exactly what is written. We established the demographics of the new recruits already; no need to belabor that point further. It is well-known that many recruits are enticed by the exit opportunities from the military or to pay for further schooling. Again a previous link corroborated this: "Indeed, one of the major motivations for young people to enlist is to earn educational benefits to use during service or after they leave the service." Many Army commercials drive this point when they refer to it in their spots. "I do not mention this to belittle our military"; that seems pretty straightforward. The part in parens is straight forward as well; many soldiers are college educated and come from great careers. Moreover, it makes clear that great soldiers do not need to be well educated... regardless of demographics. On this point, the link you posted states the following: "Given the nature of the military rank structure, most enlisted recruits do not have a college education or degree." Thus, the majority of the 200,000 enlisted personnel each year are not college graduates. But, to ease any of your potential concerns, the average military recruit is said "to be much more highly educated than the general public." Finally, there i no need to infer anything when the statement explains exactly what is intended (e.g., I do mention it to illustrate that for many soldiers, their intentions in joining the military are quite different from those of the WWII era soldiers."). It has nothing to do with "intellectual snobbery"; it has everything to do with what is stated... factual assertions of recruit demographics and different priorities in joining the military in different eras.
 
The same can be said for you concerning these incidents and just about every accusation that you have parroted on these boards against those whose politics you do not care for (i.e., Bill and Hillary Clinton).
Click to expand...

Yeah....me,Ted Kennedy and a slew of other Dem's who are weary of the Clinton thing :lol:

How people like you can be blind loyal to a pair like them is beyond me.
 
Redbird said:
This chart ( http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalS...a05-08_fig5.gif ) at first glance appears to show that those states that lean toward the Republican party have a higher enlistment rate while those under the Democrat tent show a lower enlistment rate.
Click to expand...


BTW... I was suprised to see that my state -- the great state of Illinois -- has one of the lowest "enlisted recruits to population" ratio in the United States. Thanks for that link.
 
NewHampshire Black Bears said:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Knowing what I know NOW about "Nam"/Iraq,.....I can definitely tell you what I would have done.
I would have PROUDLY headed for Canada, and NOT have given it a Second Though !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Canada isn't having any of that anymore. A federal court judge in Canada has cleared the way for Robin Long, a U.S. army deserter, to be deported back to his base in Fort Knox, Kentucky.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice allows for the theoretical possibility of a sentence of death for desertion; obviously, that is very unlikely here.
 
Short of an actual world war (verses the imagined WW that Bush is having) I do not believe the US will institute a draft. Should there ever be a legitimate WW like the last one, I do not believe that a draft will be needed as when a real threat exists, people will do the right thing as they did back then.
 
Mike Eddie said:
Is there are any way to send photo to my husband, he is in U.S army?
Click to expand...

Assuming he has internet access, just up load them to any number of photo web sites such as Fliker, snapfish, picasa, photobucket (they are all free) and then send him the link. He should be able to access them with out any problem.
 
Cosworth said:
Short of an actual world war (verses the imagined WW that Bush is having) I do not believe the US will institute a draft. Should there ever be a legitimate WW like the last one, I do not believe that a draft will be needed as when a real threat exists, people will do the right thing as they did back then.
Click to expand...

Take this to the bank...the Messiah will bring back selective service as an alternative to his upcoming requirement of involvement in his civil service plan.

Remember this.
 
delldude said:
Take this to the bank...the Messiah will bring back selective service as an alternative to his upcoming requirement of involvement in his civil service plan.

Remember this.
Click to expand...


What is the problem with that? I thought freedom was not supposed to be free? Perhaps when there is risk and hardship associated with freedom, people will be a little more careful with it.
 
Cosworth said:
What is the problem with that? I thought freedom was not supposed to be free? Perhaps when there is risk and hardship associated with freedom, people will be a little more careful with it.
Click to expand...

Dem's bringing back required military service?

Dude....they were,for the most part the ones burning draft cards in the 60's if you didn't know.

You know...anti-war....better shot in the back running to Canada than looking Charlie in the eye.
 
Were the "dems" burning draft cards during WWII? I do not recall hearing/reading about that? I recall reading about kids from all walks of life were lying about their age in order to sign up.

Do you think it could have had something to do with the nature of the war rather than the idea of war it's self? I would not fight a war I felt was morally unjust either. I would either leave the country or face the consequences by going to jail. Something our current VP did not even have the fortitude to do with his 5 deferments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Garfield1966
That SOB of POTUS is going to screw us to the last day
Replies
7
Views
1K
Garfield1966
Garfield1966
U
  • Locked
Merger Colated Statements
Replies
1
Views
1K
Dog Wonder
Dog Wonder

Latest posts

Back
Top