WASHINGTON, May 12, 2008 – All military services met or exceeded their recruiting goals for April, with the Marine Corps recruiting 142 percent of its goal, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said here today.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=49848

A question that occurs to me is, considering the amount of information available about the Iraq "war," what aside from the paycheck is the difference between these enlistees and those who sign up with Blackwater as mercenaries?

I am reminded of the latter years of the Vietnam debacle when many young men were defecting to Canada to avoid being drafted into that phony "war" the recruiting stations were still signing up enlistees. I'm also reminded of the woman in Michael Moore's, Farenheit 9/11, who thought her son's decision to join the Army and go to Iraq was a good idea. Until he was killed.

Is the instant preceding death what it takes for these people to finally see the light? Don't they acknowledge the glaring possibility they could be killed -- or worse? And for what reason? Do they really believe they are serving their country -- or are they simply hoping the rest of us believe it?

Opinions and comments are invited.

The recruiters are getting better? They can promise more and deliver less?

Soon, the armed services and entertainment will be the only thing we don't outsource, and I'm not sure about armed services. Jobs anywhere BUT military are getting scarce. That's one way to implement a draft.

No, they aren't getting better.

Here's how it works. They set some arbitrary goal at the start of the cycle. Then the recruiters go to work.

The cycle nears it's end and the recruitment goal is nowhere near met so they lower the goal to be well beneath what they've already gotten then declare they've exceeded their goal.

I've talked with recruiters, that IS how it works.

Bush Did Sign The New GI Bill The Other Day.

To Get Some Education Perhaps,
O And The inflation Economy Is Also A Driving Factor also.

I really would like to believe that but the numbers shown in the article I read (URL) are impressive, reflecting about a collective ten thousand enlistments. That's a lot considering the present circumstances.

I think GCurry is on to a big part of the reason here...

Not if the original goal was 15k. I have actually talked with recruiters. I've spoken with enlisted officers who have done recruiting and have declined to be a recruiter because it is a bullshit job where you lie every day. Yes there are quotas but there really aren't severe punishments for not making it.

That's interesting that "enlisted officers" (there is no such thing as an enlisted officer - you are either enlisted personnel or an officer) declined to be a recruiter.
When you're in the military, you take the assignment you're given. They can request another assignment but they are not guaranteed to get it. Military personnel rotate through various jobs, depending on their MOS (military occupational specialty) about every 4 years. Most officers will rotate through a recuiting assignment at least once in their career.

I've known a number of Marine officers who were recruiters at one time or another. I've NEVER heard one of them say that they intentionally lied about military benefits.

Both enlisted and officers sign a contract of commitment. The terms of their benefits are clearly outlined.

If someone signs up and thinks they don't have the potential to wind up in Iraq, then that's their ignorance.

When the economy sucks, Pell Grants (for college funding) are cut, people can't find jobs, etc. etc.

Go figure.

Enlisted Officer v. Non-commissioned Officer, way to split hairs -- yutz.

The person who declined was offered a position as a recruitment officer instead of leaving when his commitment was up. He declined and left.

Splitting hairs? I don't think so. And I don't think that those who serve consider it "splitting hairs".


Types of military personnel:
Junior enlisted
Non-commissioned officers (NCO), progression through enlisted ranks
Warrant Officer Corps
Commissioned Officers
Five Star Rankings

Your one friend who declined the assignment is hardly an example of military personnel declining an assignment to recruitment status.

You don't like recruiters, and that's your privilege. But don't demean the service of thousands of Americans who serve with pride and dignity. It's an all volunteer military. Anyone who disagrees with recruitment policies does not have to join.

What are you talking about? What makes you think I hate recruiters? (Oh, he's on a liberal message board so he must hate everything I like hurr hurr hurr.) I don't. I have nothing against recruiters OR the military; they're doing a job to get by and I respect that.

Yes recruiters lie, but I don't have a problem with that. Any person who leaves a recruiter expecting margaritas and a post in Hawaii is a fool who deserves whatever rock he gets placed on. The recruiter does a job, and that's fine.

Also, if a mislabeling (and it really isn't) demeans those in service, I'd hate to see what a real insult looks like. Maybe I'll mistake Army infantry for Marines one day and you'll go off on how I must hate America because I can't tell two people holding a rifle and wearing fatigues apart. Seriously, learn the difference between an insult and a mislabel (even though it really isn't); it could save your life.

Propaganda, they've probably lowered their quotas so low that they couldn't help but make them. Also the services have had a big advertising push on of late. When your young and dumb you believe yourself to be invincible. They can't even comprehend death. That's why we need to see more coffins in news.

I remeber from my service the one source most critical of the integrity of military recruiters - drill sergeants.

"what kind of piece of crap did that damn recruiter send me now" I remember it like it was yesterday.

Or that whole bit about AIT and the recruiters' famous claims that the only role the drill sergeants played there was to march you to and from classes, but that it ws otherwise much like most colleges. The drills at the 232nd at Sam Houston made it their mission to dispel that lie from day one.

The goals must be shit because "Stop Loss" is still in effect.

Well, there is a few factors in place here:

1. They did lower the quota to meet it.
2. The standards are not the same as when I joined 25 years ago, they have raised the maximum age requirement to I think around 40 now, and they take fatter people. They also take people with some criminal records (nothing too heinous) and with some disabilities.
3. They are not failing hardly anyone. There is a notable story about a recruit with diminshed intelligence but not technically retarded who couldn't shoot a rifle to save his life. Even when he failed time after time they kept him back until he passed it. (From my own experience they can fudge this, you need to hit a minimum number of targets but the drill sergeant is the one who counts manually). He was then sent to Iraq and died within a few months despite many opinions (Doctors, NCO's, etc.) that he was unfit for any duty.

Take all that together, you do reach the numbers you need, but the people in place are hardly top notch.