Actually SnowWolf - the correct Monty Python line is "I FART in your general direction". But perhaps I'm splitting hairs.

elmysterio August 19th, 2008 3:40 pm

"I would argue that if your country was more responsible in it's international dealings and didn't feel the need to "project it's power" beyond it's own borders, you wouldn't have the need for a large military like you have. There's one thing the US does very well, and that's creating enemies for itself.

And really, I can't think of a single instance that the US military fought to defend any "rights" of the people… And don't say WW2, because that's bullshit.'

Well think of what kind of world we would currently have if after WW1 the US decided to be totally isolationist. Japan would be ruling asia and the pacific, who would stop them the Australians? Germany would be ruling europe and don't give me that bullshit the Russians would have stopped them, 80% of the Russian farm land was under nazi control, the Russian army and population was starving it was American farms that fed them. At the end of WW2 the only thing that stopped Stalin from marching to the English Channel and possibly crossing it was the American Armed Forces. I do believe we fought for the rights of the European people NOT to live under nazism if they did not want to and and we stood in front of the Russian army to defend the rights of the western Europeans NOT to live under communism if they did not want to. Now YOU might like to live under the totalitarian rule of communism but hundreds of millions of other people did not. Would England have been able to stop Stalin? How about France? How about Brazil?
At the end of WW2 there was democracy where you could live your life pretty much as you pleased and communism where the government told you what to do, how to do, and when to do, and if you didn't you died. Next to islam, communism has killed more people than anything else in the world. There is no question that in many respects after WW2 the US fucked up quite a bit, it's just to bad that Ron Paul is not the republican presidential candidate, as president I'm sure he would un-fuck up (thats fix) what many past presidents since WW2 have fucked up.

"This group wants to have a debate. That's not what these career days are for."

Havent read all the comments so it probably was mentioned.

Just pick a few people like Meadea Benjamin and explain how they could have a career in anti-war activism.

J4zonian, with rights come responsibilities. I have a right to say whatever I want, but that doesn't mean it's right for me to verbally abuse people, or go around slandering an innocent person or crying fire in a crowded building. You have a right to defend yourself, but that doesn't mean it's right to bully people and abuse them physically, go around killing people to steal from them. It also doesn't mean that if a guy punches you in the face, it's right to follow him home and kill him and his family, but few people are going to argue that it would be wrong to fight back to protect yourself. The Bush administration is essentially following the person home, robbing it, killing the guy, burning his house to the ground, and then proceeding to do the same to all his neighbors.

It's made even worse because we're all complicit. We give them the power to do it, with our money, with abiding by their laws when they use violence against us in our name. The US military is OUR military, it's OUR violence being abused by a small group of people for personal profit because we have relinquished our right to violence to the government. Like I said earlier, if you don't want to use violence, that's awesome. But government IS violence, by definition, so if you truly believe in nonviolence the only way to achieve that is by refusing the authority of government (taking back your personal right to violence), and then choosing not to use it. By participating in government, by accepting police, by condoning the use of coercive power to enforce laws, you are using violence. You're just absolving your conscience of the act in the same way that soldiers who have relinquished their right to violence to their COs believe they are absolved of guilt by following orders.

Snowwolf said: "Sorry I lost my temper but nothing makes me more angry than a bunch of people running down the military when they clearly live under the umbrella of their protection…"

I would argue that if your country was more responsible in it's international dealings and didn't feel the need to "project it's power" beyond it's own borders, you wouldn't have the need for a large military like you have. There's one thing the US does very well, and that's creating enemies for itself.

And really, I can't think of a single instance that the US military fought to defend any "rights" of the people... And don't say WW2, because that's bullshit.

CosmonautZero,

OF COURSE you're angry and frustrated!

That has nothing to do with whether non-violence will work. One has to be able to act and then let go of attachment to results, and if one can't then the way out is to follow a practice that will develop those skills. Remember the Amritsar massacre and the daily small acts of violence against the Indian people by the British? Bull Connor, dogs, fire hoses, lynchings, bombings, activists disappearing in the night--do you think no violence was used against the civil rights movement? Rape, economic bondage--do you think no violence was used against the women's rights movement? There will always be casualties; violence has always been accepted as a tool of the powerful. By definition, the powerful get to make the rules, and the first rule is the powerful have a monopoly on the use of violence. That doesn't matter.

And the powerful are always better at it and have more resources with which to buy violence, and control over childhood with which to inculcate it in the young. The vast majority of the time, violence against violence results in more effective repression of the less powerful by the more powerful, and the very very few exceptions without home court advantage (Napoleon in Spain, Vietnam, etc.) are notable BECAUSE they're exceptions.

If you say people have a right to violence, how can you disagree with the Bush administration, who is simply using that right? Or do you mean YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS have a right to violence when you get too frustrated to find peaceful methods?

We have a right to air, water, food, shelter, land, free speech, bodily safety, mental-emotional integrity, dignity in life and death, the right to have all our developmental needs met, due process and the other legal rights guaranteed by the Constitution ...probably some others I'm forgetting. We have the right to love.

No one has a 'right' to use violence.

No one has a right to use violence, and the moment we say anyone does we have to say everyone does, and that is the last step into a world of horror and neverending hell. No thank you.

Career Day is a recruitment tool. Period. Whether it's for the military, or various industries, these are organizations with a stake in getting you to work for them when you're young and malleable, and to prevent you from recognizing non-consumerist choices for your life. It's encouraging the dehumanizing worldview that puts your identity as a worker first. "Don't know what you want to BE when you grow up, then come listen to these paid advertizements!"

Honestly, I'm not sure how much I believe in non-violence anymore. When soldiers can willfully demolish civilian homes without flinching, and the international community is impotent to censure them or their COs, I'm not sure how effective non-violence can be. I don't know, I called myself a pacifist for a long time, but... Now I think that the socialization of violence is the real problem. That police and military are given the power to commit acts of violence with impunity, it is assumed, naively, that they are acting in the public interest, when in reality they are controlled by private interests with large sums of money. You have a right to violence. If you choose not to utilize it, that's great, I'll fully support you in it. But if you choose to relinquish it to others to wield for you in the form of police and military, it's a recipe for oppression.

I don't know what the hell I was thinking when I was talking about the pro-military/anti-war POV... That's actually a really common POV, I was just responding to the ideas themselves, especially the disgust with the current military system coupled with a recognition that armed defense is perhaps beneficial and a call for a vast reduction in military spending. I, foolishly, felt the need to label it. Bad habit from my time in college.

arise 257
First of all, activism IS a paid career choice, and can be a lifelong, rewarding one in many ways. Second, seems to me career day should be about getting advice on careers, which is exactly what anti-recruiters do: offer free advice to people who want it, and with no selfish message-twisting motives themselves, to boot. I can't argue militarists aren't learning a skill, but I can argue about how valuable it is, how valuable the penumbra of other skills are (following orders they know to be stupid or insane, a compulsive fetish for neatness and order, a slavish loyalty to a violent male hierarchy, a constantly reinforced disregard for women, gays, and many ethnic groups, and an anti-intellectualism and intolerance for disagreement that makes me scared for our country and democracy and world. That's what people learned who I've known were in the military. I agree with you that we could cut our military to a fraction of what it is, but we could go further, and instill in everyone an intolerance of tyranny with effective non-violent tools of resistance that freed India, Eastern Europe and the US's minorities and women. That is better than any squad of armed teens obliged to do what someone else tells them.

SnowWolf,

Judging by this as well as my last encounter with you, you seem to have a bottomless fury over Clinton cutting the size of the military as well as a penchant for juvenile name-calling and ad hominem attacks. Why is that? Are you/were you in the military? (Never mind—answered already) Defense contractor? Splain, please, if you would. And would you please call me angry names and criticize my intelligence or man/womanhood before you answer?

Questions for you:

Somebody has to defend America against what exactly? Against whom exactly? Clinton's reduction of the military was the beginning of a rational response to the ending of belligerence toward a country that didn't exist anymore, despite a half century of us creating conflict and giving them an enemy to mobilize against and create fear about in its populace. The effect was to polarize the world and prop up an otherwise unworkable system, (theirs or ours—take your pick) while depriving billions of the resources they could have used to grow food, build houses and schools and cure diseases. Our enemies today are even less able to hurt us except in our trembling imaginations. Cuba? Grenada? Nicaragua? Angola? Afghanistan (the 2nd poorest country in the world!)? Iraq? Venezuela? North Korea? and on and on. You say they thought they could beat us because they saw us as weak, but why did they want to, if we had done nothing to them? (To find out what we may have done to them, read In Search of Enemies by John Stockwell, Overthrow by Stephen Kinzer, Blowback, etc. by Chalmers Johnson… )

And aren't the long deployments and personpower shortages because even though they are very manipulable when it comes to hating someone, in the long run people have better sense than to volunteer to die for the benefit of oil companies while getting government pay? And the shortages are, if not planned, at least welcome, (although really, planned, as G. Norquist and Rumsfeld stated) as Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld et al. were following the Milton Friedman plan for hollowing out the government, DOD included, for the benefit of many corporations and certain unconscious desires to achieve a particular vision of family and society.

Someone sees you as weak and wants to hurt you? Does that fit something in your personal life? Not that it's any of my business, but it's been true of me and almost everyone I've known that their politics are far more personal than they know—until they examine their own lives and histories. It might be something worth looking into.

When you say America do you mean South America? Central America? The Canadian or Mexican parts of North America? Or do you mean the U.S.A.? If so, why not say that?)

The umbrella of "American" military protection seems like it's turned inside out and is collecting water and dumping it down our collars. I wish you would answer skippyagogo, although I think his/her post dignifies itself. And whether we've been in it or not if we love our country and the world we MUST criticize the use of the military. Note that this is no comment on the character of the people in it. They are as wonderful and terrible a bunch of people as exist anywhere else. (Just with training that guns and bombs are solutions to social, political and psychological problems.)

I'm sorry SnowWolf but either you really don't know much or are willing to lie about—well, about nearly everything. I presume, though you don't actually say it, Wimpy, that you think drilling in 10 years will bring down the price of oil today, when actually only conservation, solar and wind can change demand/supply so fast.

Bush hasn't done too badly? Wow… don't know where to start…

so I'll just leave it to the majority of US public and overwhelming majority of polled historians who agree he's the worst US president ever.

>>Unless one has actually BEEN in the Military I recommend not criticizing it

Which contradicts your previous (baseless) claim that those who served in the Military were defending the peoples right to free speech.

As others have pointed out, American Liberties the Military claims to defend have eroded most at the hands of its own Government, and not to some external threat.

Dying and killing in Vietnam did nothing to protect Americans Free speech.

arise, you make a lot of good points. It's kind of refreshing to hear a pro-military/anti-war point of view. I don't really agree with you that something recognizable as a military is necessary (maybe I'm quibbling over semantics, but I think militias are sufficient), but it's a viewpoint that's frighteningly rare. I think any sort of a standing military is an invitation to disaster, simply because of the MIC lobbies and special interests. When you're selling guns, the best advertizement you can ask for is a war, and if you're already invested in producing a certain number of tanks or whatever, you have a vested interest in creating demand for them. Until we can take back control of our country from the special interests and institute actual democracy, your defense-only military is just a pipe dream.

First of all, I 100% agree that antiwar activists SHOULD NOT be given tables at career days. Career day is for finding a job or vocation that cuts a paycheck, and last time I checked, activism is unpaid. If there are antiwar organizations that are HIRING kids then fine, give them a table. If they just wanna counterbalance military recruiting by scaring kids from the military, no table. I can't even believe there's an argument here about that...

Secondly, not every kid has to be recruited into military service. I can recall at least 5 kids from my high school who WANTED to go into the military right after they graduated because THEY LIKE the idea of fighting wars. You can probably blame that on society or some maladjustment on their part, but it was how they envisioned their futures.

Third, like it or not, the military IS A CAREER and it has clear opportunities for advancement. Actually combat soldiers are not the majority of people serving in the military, they're just the most visible part. I have 3 friends that are mechanics for the Marines. I have a moral problem with fixing machines that will likely be involved with a murder spree, but you can't argue that they're not learning a valuable skill that has applications in or out of the military.

Fourth, the military, even in a pacifist's wet dream is absolutely necessary for the protection of our country. Snow Wolf is being a little more than retarded by claiming that they "protect our freedoms". They don't at all. They protect the investment that is America. If you were walking in a dangerous neighborhood with $100,000 cash in a suitcase, the military is the gun you'd want to have in case you got mugged. A country without a military is not a country at all because it has no security. I think if we reduced the capacity of our military to defense-only, we could easily shave it down to 10% of the national budget. If that happened, recruiters wouldn't have to lie to kids, antiwar activists could retire to more productive hobbies, wars of aggression would be a thing of the past and everyone could shut the fuck up.

The crux of the issue in this entire debate is how our military is being abused for the sustained profit of a few rich, well-connected individuals. It's how our media, our military, and weapons manufacturers are intertwined in a never-ending circle-jerk, each orgasm bringing death and destruction to the "enemy", corruption and oppression to the homeland. It's how we have 50% of the worlds capacity to take life, and seemingly no capacity to improve it. This is the situation we have to overcome if there is any hope for humanity, and truthfully, it will require a cataclysmic event to change it.

Recruiters make all kinds of promises, education, good jobs, medical services. I want them to hear disabled veterans who should be getting pensions and service from the VA, but they got screwed. They suffer from PTSD, but the psyciatgrist is paid (ordered) to rule that it was caused by a pre-existing problem, so that they are not entitled to either pension or medicalservices.
I want students to know that so many veterans have been screwed and that it's very likely to happen to them. If that prevents them from enlisting, maybe our country will have to stop doing it.

"Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hope of its children. ... We pay for a single fighter plane with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than eight thousand people. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging upon a cross of iron."

So someone tell me why we continue to support the troops and romanticize the notion of training kids to kill for a career choice? Someone tell me why we spend over half (54% for 2009)of our discretionary tax dollars on death? And this does not include the spending on Iraq or Afghanistan. And to beat all this comes from the hypocritical pro life group?

PUhleeze...........

If you had a padded expense account that allowed you to spend $1 million dollars a day on whatever you wanted, it would take you 1,918 years to spend as much as we've spent on Iraq and Afghanistan through March 2008.

So someone, tell me again, WTF are we doing?

A major design feature of modern educational systems is training kids to live in modern society not notice all the many problems with it. Far from teaching kids critical thinking, traditional educational systems teach kids NOT to think, to merely accept what they are told, regurgitate it on command, and forget it as quickly as possible, in addition to indoctrinating kids into assumptions about the way society, government, economics work wand ways to cope with the way the way they're stacked against us. Career days are just another facet of that, producing assumptions about the breadth and scope of economic options available to the, invariably by industries that make enough money exploiting their workers or consumers to be able to afford to send delegates. This article doesn't surprise me because it's completely symptomatic of the abuse of the education. That's, of course, not to say that teachers don't have good intentions, much like military personnel they are simply manipulated into performing their deleterious function.

Snow Wolf, tell you what. I'll take my chances. If there's a ground invasion, don't come "protect" me, and I'll stop paying the portion of my taxes that goes to the military. What, you mean I don't have that option? So basically the military is no different from any other gang charging "protection money" against imaginary, invented, and created threats, while aggressively pursuing interests in new areas.

Snow Wolf,

Saddam, or the Taliban, or tiny stateless criminal gang Al Quieda, or the North Vietnamese/NLV, or Nicaragua, or El Salvador or Panama, or Grenada never threatened the Bill of Rights, and any notion that they ever can or could have is absolutely looney fantasy.

Only your "Commander in Chief", and his bi-partisan sycophantic stooges in Congress are dismantling the Bill of Rights.

Not since 1812, has the US military has anthhing to do with defending the US Constitution.

You are NOT protecting any of my freedoms - this is an utterly Orwellian lie.

SnowWolf
I've been in the freaking military, idiot.

Not only do I have a right to criticise it, but so does everyone else.

Don't your taxes pay for its upkeep?

Don't your taxes pay for the bombs dropped on your corporation's enemies?

If you served in the forces wolfiekins it was as a REMF.

"Unless one has actually BEEN in the Military I recommend not criticizing it"

Sorry - I don't buy it. It is pretty self-serving. The rest of us live in the world, can see the effects of militarism on our loved ones, our communities, our economy. Why should we shut up and not practice the democratic freedom you say that you have protected for us?

SnowWolf - how old are you? The last war that had anything to do with protecting us was WW II. The "wars" since then have been invasions and occupations of countries that have not attacked us, and these bully actions have resulted in totally unnecessary deaths on both sides.

And nobody should have to leave the USA if we disagree with policies. It is our home, our land and our families and friends live there. We just need better educational and job opportunities for young people. Something that doesn't involve murder or being used up for no good reason, say.

There will always be threats to all countries at all times...Islamic Terrorism is just the threat du jour...

Bush really hasn't done too damn badly considering the hand he got dealt

Kive = Live

Sorry I lost my temper but nothing makes me more angry than a bunch of people running down the military when they clearly kive under the umbrella of their protection...there is PLENTY wrong in America to debate...Hell...I might even agree with you on some points...the Military is not one of them...

Unless one has actually BEEN in the Military I recommend not criticizing it

As soon as we quit filling the ranks of the military for cannon fodder, the sooner we will stop inflicking our brand of "democracy" around the globe. Ask you recruiter about depleted uranium, the gift that keeps on giving.

snowwolf:
what's your problem today? Did a person who saw something was wrong with America do something about it and look for a better life OUTSIDE america? America is not going in, I feel the right direction. Some may agree some not. I don't feel the next election in america is going to change a thing for the better. The top 3 or 2 people running for the job of president are a joke.

Don't worry about coming back, in fact the next family reunion since I do have family still in america well THEY ALL ASKED for it to be held in CANADA. Who knows maybe some will stay a little longer and never go back themselves.
I do have a question for you please, what on earth has bush protected the usa from in the last 8 years?

My nephew got suckered into joining the National Guard for the educational benefits. When he was finished his duties and wanted to start college NG decided that they didn't want to fund his choice of school. They thought training as a welder was more what he should do.
He is now in a masters program and at the top of his class. He's also in more debt than he will probably ever be able to pay off. Besides that he wrecked his back in basic training. The National Guard won't pay for that either.

It is a great country when the military has the right given to them to come in and fill young kids with war propaganda and what a wonderful opportunity the service is for their future, also how they are doing such a patriotic service for our country by spreading liberty and democracy in the world. Notice how the people pushing for constant war never think it is a good opportunity for their own childrens future. By the time many kids realize they have been taken for a ride, they are dead, injured for life, suicidal, or mentally unfit for life.

one more brick in the wall!!!!!!!!

rtdrury--To parasphrase Lincoln Steffens famous comment after visiting Russia in 1919, "I have seen your future and it's called the Amish". Although I don't go for their:

shunning of electricity
intermarriage (cause of many birth defects among the faithful)
hypocrisy of shuning smoking but raising tobbaco
hot, stuffy, out of date (by 150+ years) clothing styles.
long beards
rejection of internal combustion powered equipment

By the time most Amish boys and girls reach puberty they are quite literate and possessed of all the basic skills needed to survive as subsistence farmers as well as the capacity to do the hard work such a life requires.

They also accumulate no little bit of wealth since:

they do not pay social security
buy any insurance
avoid almost all taxes
shun credit of any sort and operate on a "cash only" basis.

They can do this because the entire community is each other's welfare state.

You could not have any more honest, reliable, or trustworthy neighbors than Amish. Most of America though is not willing to trade their idle distraction for the life of hard work required to thrive as subsistence farmers.

Why are military recruiters allowed a table? The military is no "career". The military says they defend freedom while in reality they kill people in foreign lands(along with getting some of themselves killed along the way). They waste billions of dollars that could be spent improving our country.

This school should show some leadership and kick these recruiters out of their career day. The military created(by "just following orders" as the Germans did in WW2) the horror that is now Afghanistan and Iraq. They should be held accountable.

Poet: "the core problem is lack of economic choice for young people trying to get started in adult life. Maybe that would make a good election year discussion"

The start of such a discussion is to discover the minimum bucks one must churn this evil capitalist system in order to "make it". Answer: Zero. Build self-sufficient local economies. What an impressive range of economic choices - learning all the skills to satisfy all the needs of the local community. For starters the food is going to be wonderful. The quality of the building structures - excellent. The education in the local one-room school house - superb. The locally produced machinery and tools - the best. One guy is the water well expert. This lady is the textiles expert. This one makes things out of wood. That one does glass.

When the federal chimps come groveling up to try and tax you, that is when you set the terms. The standard template: Chimps get out, keep your infrastructure projects out, keep your corporations, your military, your banks and your political parties and everything else out of this community. You go back to Washington, keep your ears tuned in and you will take orders from us. Now get the hell out of here.

SnowWolf,

Just curious, in what war did you "defend my freedom of speech"? The war of 1812? You can't be that old!

adrienrain

I would be willing to contribute to a fund that would allow all of you to leave for the Socialist Shithole of your choice...perhaps after the next election when the Dems get kicked out of power for being obtuse about $4 a gal gas...

the only requirements...renounce your citizenship and sign legal papers that you will never return...I bet there are plenty of Folks in this Country that would contribute

skippyagogo41

I won't even dignify your stupidity...

I appreciate the feedback. I'm not myself religious, except for a nascent spiritualism, so I'm not touting recruitment into religious orders per se.

I was just looking for a way around the administrative reluctance to open typical mundane Career Days to advocacy and political activist groups wishing to present a legitimate counterpoint to nefarious and hyped career choices. It occurred to me that non-violent and non-predatory employers, meager though their employment opportunities may be, might get in the door and effect some appropriate subversion.

Snow Wolf, the military can be a career option if youth know what they are getting into.

If recruiters told the truth (and I mean the WHOLE truth: blood, guts and all) 100% of the time it would drive away some, but those that remain will be committed to serving.

When I applied to FedEx they took me on a tour of the sorting floor. The guy told me they did this so I would know EXACTLY what I am getting myself into. He explained that I could seriously hurt myself or be injured by others. Some parcels are heavy and could crush me. That's the level of honesty I expect from a recruiter.

I didn't take the job because a better one came along. If it hadn't I would have worked at FedEx. I knew what the risks were and decided it was worth it.

I'm not against recruiting, however I am for telling the truth. If some kid hears it out and still wants to join go for it.

Little Brother
Actually I think that the religeous orders would have a better chance of getting a table than an anti-recruitment org. In spite of church state seperation they're not asking the state to provide them money, they're asking people to take vows of poverty; oh, wait, maybe they're not going to get far with most people these days.

Snow twit; The army does not now, nor has it ever defended your rights. It exists to prop up the corporate rule of the richest people in america. You don't have the rights specified in your constitution because of an army, you have them because the politicians of the day thought they were a good idea.

It would be lovely if more people COULD follow Hollow Point's advice and live in Canada, Snow Wolf. Not all of us have the resources to 'vote with our feet.'

For awhile now, I've begun to think that I am just one of nature's oddities - a Canadian mysteriously and tragically born into the body of a US citizen.

Of course I love the Constitution, but now that it is merely 'quaint' in the eyes of our rulers............................

Ok, so let's have the antiwar faction put up a job table/booth that shows opportunities in the non-profit sector? They may not pay all that well, but they can certainly be considered a worthwhile vocation - and there are opportunities for advancement for the dedicated.

One of the reasons the counterculture movement of the 60s mostly died away is that it didn't think of the future, or the kids. There should have been non-military, non-sexist alternatives to boy scouts and so on, that taught PEACE and ENVIRONMENTALISM. Now that there are charter schools, the peace community should be starting them all over the place. Why not vegetarian fast food stands? How about contacting all of the alternative fuel people, serious orgainic farmers, crafters and recyclers, sustainable manufacturers, and creating a real society a real network? THEN there would be jobs. If we don't build a real society this time, we will fail again, and the official narrative will win..........again. It didn't take them long to reposition the unwinnable, brutal war in Vietnam as a tragic lost cause, the sacrifice of brave heroes betrayed by the treachery of the left and by the 'liberal media.'

We have to leave a lasting legacy of peace activism, of peace-oriented communities, and we'd better start now, because pretty soon, there won't be ANY jobs in the US except for the military, since we no longer make anything here.

"These are young people with no experience of the world and they need a counterpoint to the skillful lies of an organization that serves corporate America."

They can read and write . They can drive a car . They can procreate ...They can do a lot of other things . If REFUSING to think and refuse makes them easy targets for the recruiters' lies then they deserve to be sent to Iraq , Afghanistan , Iran , Pakistan , ...Lower Slobovia . The faster this generation's flower of military machismo is wiped out the better for the rest of the world . See , if they are not sucked in by the recruiters then the army,marines... will run out of functional flesh . If they are sucked in and come back-in-a-bag maybe a good friend will be more discerning of the recruiters' lies .

It will be a long haul but the occupation will end

Hollow Point

Do me a favor...NEVER come back

Nothing infuriates me more than "Anti War" people who live under the umbrella of American Military Protection and denigrate the Military

I and my Brothers defended your right to free speech, better men than you'll EVER be died to give it to you and THIS is how you mis-use it?...

whats the Monty Python line? "I spit in your general direction"

Truth_Forward

Before Bill Clinton cut the guts out of it the Army had 18 Divisions...He cut it to 10...THAT is why the Guard and Reserve had to be overused and the 15 months tours came from

"You'll never go overseas, he said. One weekend a month and two weeks a year, he said. The only thing you'll battle is traffic, he said."

-What is gong through a Guardsman's head as he reads his deployment orders.

How do I know? That's pretty much verbatim the things the NG recruiter told me.

When I took Sociology in college one of the papers submitted concerned veterans. Being ages ago, the facts have become fuzzy but some points stood out:

Veterans were twice as likely as non-veterans to become homeless.

Veterans had higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse than non-veterans.

Veterans had higher rates of domestic violence and divorce than non-veterans.

Is this the military a career a youth would want if they knew the truth?

A recruiter told me that with college credits I could come in with advanced rank but after researching the paper a vow was made never to join the military.

On a side note: My father (a Seabee and Vietnam vet) refuses to go into a VA hospital, even if it's free, because the conditions are so bad.

Read the article twice. Did I miss something or did the article NOT say when this career fair was?

The problem here is not military recruiting, the problem is promoting the military as a "career choice". Why should anyone want to be a mercinary at the mercy of whoever happens to be Commander-in-Chief? Because the military has conned its recruits to believe:

1. They will get to do somehing besides kill people or destroy property
2. They probably won't get killed oir badly wounded physically or psychologically.
3. If they do get hurt they will be taken care of.
4. They will gets lots of money for having completed thier hitches.

These are the reasons that youth who otherwise don't have to do so, allow themselves to be conned into military service. As has been pointed to above, the core problem is lack of economic choice for young people trying to get started in adult life. Maybe that would make a good election year discussion. Hmmm...

If kids stayed in school got a good education the military recruiters would be out of work

and we soon wouldn't have a country...don't be a moron...SOMEBODY has to defend America

think about it

As has been stated above, the obvious solution to the quandary is for the people who think that dying for the military/industrial complex is foolish is to offer jobs or careers or something similar. Then the Gillis' who don't really care about the kids' welfare will have to find some other pretext to keep the kids in harms' way.

Is it just me, or does anyone else think they could have done a better job with those banners? They make it look like the cost of the Iraq war to date (instead of just 2008) is 155 billion. Why not use the total cost, or even the projected 3 trillion cost? Why no mention of the Afghan War?

If kids stayed in school got a good education the military recruiters would be out of work.
OR do as I did, I moved the fuck out of the USA. Both my kids have jobs as there are lots in Canada. BOTH HAVE FULL BENEFITS DENTAL, DRUG AND HEALTH AND A PENSION PLAN

Well one way to put your point across is ask for a booth and offer a job to these kids BESIDES the military. Job creation is the answer not you have Wal Mart or the military as it looks like in more and more cities in the USA.

Little Brother----
Smooth move there on that suggestion.

Take it just one step further---and make a "career day" argument for the Medical Profession and take those same young people to a VA Med. Center----which ever one is closest is most likely to be very crowded.

They could learn for example the long term effects of multiple amputations on the "quality of life"---(ask one of those who have experienced MultAmps if it was worth all the pain for a country that most likely forgot about your sacrifice)----or the long term effects of PTSD on the quality of life---(one question to ask those patients; how long has it been since the last time your were committed---was it voluntary or court ordered---how do you relate to others, your family, your children, your dog-----how well do you keep a job-----etc

Then take them over to the ward where Agent Orange Vets (a new category that is begining to compete with the Depleted Uranium Exposure Vets) are "quartered"---and the "isolation wards " where many of them are forced to satay because they have little or no immune system function)

I have been a patient of/at VA Med Centers----I have never seen so much suffering that could have been prevented----if only those who volunteered had known what could have been in store for them---or in my era (Vietnam) the draftees, who would have spent jail time had they refused service but might have had a different life if they had remained intact----instead of serving in yet one more illegal war of aggression.

Those who are inclined to be "progressive thinkers" may be "out numbered" by the "conservative thinkers"----but how difficult is it to "outsmart a fool"?

Thanks for your time.....

A few years ago in Spokane, Washington, a group of us challenged the Spokane District 81 superintendent and school board regarding its improper handling of the opt-out provisions of the "No Child Left Behind" legislation which requires districts to give military recruiters access to high school children's personal data. Though we succeeded in getting them to take minimal steps to make the opt-out provision more visible to parents, there is still no access to the schools by advocates of alternatives to military service in the imperialist war schemes of the U.S.

Can someone create or does anyone know of a counter-recruitment CD or DVD available with a combination of video, music and informational resources which could be reproduced and handed out to school kids on their way too or from school or leaving school events such as football games, etc? If you know of such a resource, please contact me at arroyoribera@earthlink.net

There is no "Fairness Doctrine" or "equal time" which I wish was brought back. The Courts, the Congress President Reagan and the FCC recinded that in the 80's in their infinite wisdom. It would be great to have that at career fairs, visits to schools by politicians for campaign events and of course on FAUX News, I mean the Republican News Network and O'Reilly Factor and the other right wing, reactionary, regressive, repressive Neandertals on the TV and radio waves.

Separation between church and state, Little Brother.

The military is about life and death.
They have a skillfully laid out presentation to 'sucker' young people into believing in some false ideal.
These are young people with no experience of the world and they need a counterpoint to the skillful lies of an organization that serves corporate America.
Who is going to do this if not a peace organization?
Maybe this group should ally itself with the Friends, or Kucinich and his idea of a Department of Peace; regardless, we have to begin to counter the militarization of America.
Can Blackwater be far behind...?

Just curious, I really don't have a clue-- do public school Career Days allow religious organizations to participate? For instance, can a local Roman Catholic diocese, or any other denomination or religious order, promote religious vocation?

The question arises because, as skippyagogo41 suggests, the concept of "Career Day" is to get students thinking about earning a living. Taking the narrowest view, the death merchants DO get an unfair advantage: whether it's the armed forces luring fresh meat into the military, or defense contractors wooing young geeks and techies, they ARE offering the (steady) paycheck that is the definition of "career" in capitalist Amerika.

And come to think of it, the same can be said for other problematic corporate careers, e.g. agribusiness, energy cartels, etc.

As sympathetic as I am to the argument that military recruiters in particular are notorious for accentuating the "positive" perks and benefits of military service while eliminating the negatives of both the risks and deleterious effects and the moral quagmire of life as essentially an Imperial storm trooper-- and as much as I'm always ready to bash chickenshit school administrators from vice-principals on up-- I do see their quandary.

Thus, my question; I was about to comment, somewhat whimsically, that maybe the Society of Friends (aka Quakers) could participate to promote careers in their organization. Or the ACLU could attend to promote a career protecting civil liberties, etc., and bring some countervailing balance to the soul-sucking future employers.

Because unless Career Days are expanded to include "meta-participants" present to provide a larger context for the implications of this or that career choice, which would become a logistical nightmare and circus unless impeccably managed, the only "counter-career" presence seems limited to organizations that offer a PAYCHECK.

It does seem a difficult dilemma.

Why they shouldn't peace activists be allowed where military recruiters are? Isn't it the standard practice in this country to ALWAYS give equal time for opposing views? Why should the rules concerning war or peace be any different?

I say it shouldn't. And those opposing war shouldn't have to fight for the right to present their views, most especially when it involves the life or death of our children.

For materials for young people about alternatives to the military as a path to education and career, information about conscientious objection to war if a draft, etc., go to American Friends Service Committee (Quakers) at www.afsc.org.

Isn't career day about finding something to do that earns you money? If that is the purpose then they shouldn't get a table, as the antiwar activists pay less than Greenpeace does.

Just because they don't get a table doens't mean they can't stand next to the recruiters with a nice picture or two...