bunkum
Sanditon
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 4501 |
Chips, your criticism is absolutely correct and very insightful. The campaigns in the past have served to bring in some of the lowest of the low, people who could never make it in the real world--at a job or in school. Hell, my father--God bless him--probably crashed more cars driving drunk than the local hillbillies at the time that he signed up, and those were the "good ol' days." He broke every rule he could, and enjoyed doing so. The current campaigns speak to our country's "philosophy," which we see rampant in government programs and in schools. The individual is supreme over all, and relativism rules the day.
Rant aside, I can give some facts to back up some of the claims against the campaigning:
a) When someone enlists, they are offered a bonus if they agree to serve beyond the required time. Their pay, over time, is larger than if they do their required four years only.
b) The monthly pay for an enlisted soldier is fairly low--less than $600 a month, but that entails living in the barracks with meals provided. They receive more money if they get married and move out. Young men call up their high school sweethearts, and say, "Let's get hitched," under the notion that two can live as cheaply as one. If they don't get married, many take out a lease or sign up for hefty payments on a car they can't really afford. If they have a dollar, they'll spend then. They're young.
c) The soldiers go on their tour, the wives stay at home, separated from family and friends from their hometowns (unless they lived near the base). Cheating is rampant, debts soar, life is miserable. Suddenly, everyone wonders how they got themselves into these situations.
What is needed is a stronger honesty policy at the time of sign up, continued financial counseling, debt management especially, and better ad campaigns. I'm sure a lot of people have seen the recent Navy ads, which show guys and gals doing cool manuevers in James Bondish boats, land cruisers, and air planes. Daily reality is not like that. Daily reality entails dealing with smelly bunkmates in cramped conditions, shit food, confined duty on a ship for weeks on end, endless forms to fill out and machines to monitor, and the reality that it's going to keep going for another few years.
I maintain, in agreement with you, in spite of dishonesty in advertising, that people got themselves into the situation. You sign your name, you fulfill your obligations. You don't get knocked up to avoid a tour of duty, you don't scream that you're a pacifist to avoid going to Pakistan, and you don't go AWOL. Ignorance is no excuse. And sometimes, finding out that you've signed up for something you don't fully understand can provide a good life lesson: don't do it again.
If these shits are allowed out of duty, what do they learn? That nothing is binding? That they can renegotiate every situation they get into? I don't think anyone should be allowed to claim CO after they've voluntarily enlisted, and I curse the groups that support their "rights." I hope they burn in the same hell with judges who assign ridiculous litigation claims.
__________________
"Good God! What kind of hallucinogen leaves you high enough to be blissfully unaware of a genital amputation but lucid enough to grease up a pan and cook up a wiener? "
--pervscan.com
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|