poll: letter to the editor about military recruitment woes
Posted: August 10th, 2005, 10:26 am
Subject: "The military's enlistment problem" 8/7/05
I read the editorial of Sunday 7 August, "The military's enlistment problem", http://www.sptimes.com/2005/08/07/Opini ... list.shtml
expecting some sort of opinion. The details of the current recruitment and retention woes were outlined very effectively, from the military's perspective. Also stated was the depth of the "problem" illustrated by concerned parents wanting to keep the military off the public schools.
The editiorial concluded by affirming it will not be easy to rebuild the military's troop strength, that it needs the "immediate attention of the White House, the Congress and the Pentagon."
I am wondering, was this an attempt at a neutral, objective reporting? If so, it feels rather empty handed.
The obvious was not stated, the dissaffection towards the Iraq War. By my own personal experience as a Vietnam Vet, I told my younger brother not to go upon my return, and he didn't. My step-son was gung-ho to enlist until his uncle, stuck in the Guard at age 55 and not allowed to retire, after a tour in Iraq, told him the same thing, don't go. We can tell our relatives that and it is not called sedition, but the national mindset is heading in that direction.
When President Bush's daughters and Governor Bush's lawyer son sign up, maybe calling for the immediate attention of the government will make some sense. At this juncture, it seems more like hand-wringing. I compliment the Times editorial page for addressing this issue, but am dissappointed by the inability to be more forceful in the statement. Wealthy conservatives and chicken-hawk patriots need to step up to the plate.
Of course this willnot happen and the recruitment woes will continue, until national policy changes.
I read the editorial of Sunday 7 August, "The military's enlistment problem", http://www.sptimes.com/2005/08/07/Opini ... list.shtml
expecting some sort of opinion. The details of the current recruitment and retention woes were outlined very effectively, from the military's perspective. Also stated was the depth of the "problem" illustrated by concerned parents wanting to keep the military off the public schools.
The editiorial concluded by affirming it will not be easy to rebuild the military's troop strength, that it needs the "immediate attention of the White House, the Congress and the Pentagon."
I am wondering, was this an attempt at a neutral, objective reporting? If so, it feels rather empty handed.
The obvious was not stated, the dissaffection towards the Iraq War. By my own personal experience as a Vietnam Vet, I told my younger brother not to go upon my return, and he didn't. My step-son was gung-ho to enlist until his uncle, stuck in the Guard at age 55 and not allowed to retire, after a tour in Iraq, told him the same thing, don't go. We can tell our relatives that and it is not called sedition, but the national mindset is heading in that direction.
When President Bush's daughters and Governor Bush's lawyer son sign up, maybe calling for the immediate attention of the government will make some sense. At this juncture, it seems more like hand-wringing. I compliment the Times editorial page for addressing this issue, but am dissappointed by the inability to be more forceful in the statement. Wealthy conservatives and chicken-hawk patriots need to step up to the plate.
Of course this willnot happen and the recruitment woes will continue, until national policy changes.
