American views of mil-service improve

[Saddle Bronc 124]

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1111/p02s01-usmi.html

Americans' views of military service improve

A bad economy and better news from Iraq may be helping to increase interest in and support for enlistment.

By Gordon Lubold | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

2008/11/10

Washington - The American public's increased uncertainty about military service, as casualties mounted from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has for the first time in several years begun to abate.

It's not exactly clear what is causing the new trend. But military experts and defense officials speculate that the decline in casualties in Iraq and an economic downturn at home mean more Americans see themselves joining the military or supporting someone who does.

The changing perceptions could be crucial for the next presidency, as the nation considers expanding the military even more to meet demands around the world. President-elect Barack Obama has hinted that military service is a centerpiece of his idea of national service.

Over the long term, if the trend holds, it could help increase the overall quality of the force and potentially improve upon its ethnic and economic diversity.

While the military continues to rate highly in public opinion polls – consistently above other national institutions – far fewer Americans are actually interested in joining it or seeing their son or daughter do so. And since 2003 when the US invaded Iraq, the willingness of American youth to serve in the military has decreased significantly.

Perceptions worsened with Iraq war

But new data shows that is changing.

About 11 percent of military-age individuals say they will "definitely" or "probably" be serving in the military in the next few years, up 2 percent since last year. While this is still low compared with figures prior to the Iraq war, it is the first such increase since then, according to new Pentagon data.

At the same time, perceptions of military service have either leveled out or begun to improve among parents, coaches, and teachers – "influencers" who Pentagon officials say are key to the success of their recruiting missions.

About 59 percent of adults now say they would support a young person joining the military. Their enthusiasm in recommending military service had waned since 2003 and remains far lower than it did prior to the invasion, but this is the first time it has increased since that time.

Pentagon officials are reluctant to characterize the results of the survey, which polled more than 3,000 youth ages 16 to 21. They say the uptick in positive attitudes toward military service are not yet conclusive.

Yet the changing attitudes don't come as a surprise to most analysts. "When the economy goes down, recruiting results go up," says Bernard Rostker, a former Pentagon official and now a senior fellow at RAND, a think tank in Washington.

Unemployment rates have increased – 6.5 percent nationally according to statistics released Friday – and that makes the military's health and education benefits and signing bonuses look more appealing.

Pentagon officials have long acknowledged that the economy can help recruiting. "That is a situation where more people are willing to give us a chance," said David Chu, the current manpower chief at the Pentagon in announcing the Pentagon's success in reaching the fiscal 2008 recruiting targets last month.

But it's not just the economy. More positive news from Iraq about a military that is seen as less engaged in heavy combat and more involved in rebuilding, is helping, say officers. And casualties are about the lowest they've been since the war began, with 14 fatalities in October.

Changes in perceptions of military service began to be seen a year ago, says one Marine officer who tracks recruiting, predating the economic downturn in recent months.

"I think the bad economy has less of an effect for us as recruiters than most people might think," says a Marine officer who conducts recruiting in the Midwest. He notes that the "target market" for recruiters is not laid off workers as much as high school students. And while parents are instinctively cautious about their children's decision to join the military, the officer added, it doesn't mean they are necessarily against it.

An expanding military

Ultimately, the greater interest in enlisting – including among blacks and Hispanics – could translate into an expansion in the enlisting pool, allowing the military to be more selective. It could help reduce, for example, the number of individuals enlisted with criminal backgrounds.

It remains unclear what impact an expanded American mission in Afghanistan would have on recruiting. But it's unlikely that even an expanded mission would approximate the scale of the five-year effort in Iraq.

That will be key as the military continues to grow to 547,000 in the Army and 202,000 in the Marine Corps in the next two years.

[Ban Hammer 14,573]

the military is and will remain an excellent job opportunity for many.

[Scott & Lai 12]

the military is and will remain an excellent job opportunity for many.

And an honorable profession

[alienlovechild 75]

Yet the changing attitudes don't come as a surprise to most analysts. "When the economy goes down, recruiting results go up," says Bernard Rostker, a former Pentagon official and now a senior fellow at RAND, a think tank in Washington.

Unemployment rates have increased – 6.5 percent nationally according to statistics released Friday – and that makes the military's health and education benefits and signing bonuses look more appealing.

There's part of reason for more younger people reconsidering the military. Like it or not Obama is going to need a well-trained and motivated force otherwise he loses his military options if the need arises.

When you consider how few people actually served in Iraq and Afghanistan compared to the U.S. population, you know it's the same military families doing most of the heavy lifting for generations with re-ups.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

the military is and will remain an excellent job opportunity for many.

And an honorable profession

Yup. It builds character.

[Amby 490]

I thought this was going to be about mother in laws improving

[IAMX 3,055]

Locally I've seen more people like Ehren Watada's (definitely hes my respect) come home and will refuse re-deployment. I haven't seen this much anti-war sentiment from locals and troops/vets in my lifetime. We have schools who are trying to kick military recruiters out, and for good reason. Simply put, if people can't enlist on their own volition, rather than have the military harass them for getting low grades, maybe think of a better premise for using your military. The fact that recruiters have to trick people or specifically target certain groups is enough of an insinuation as to how "honorable" I find it.

[alienlovechild 75]

I haven't seen this much anti-war sentiment from locals and troops/vets in my lifetime. We have schools who are trying to kick military recruiters out, and for good reason. Simply put, if people can't enlist on their own volition, rather than have the military harass them for getting low grades, maybe think of a better premise for using your military. The fact that recruiters have to trick people or specifically target certain groups is enough of an insinuation as to how "honorable" I find it.

California dreamin again. How close are you to Santa Cruz? There have always been recruiters and you need those guys unless you'd like to see a draft instead. How exactly can the military harass students with low grades? Who exactly are the groups targeted for requirement?

Edited November 10, 2008 by alienlovechild

[IAMX 3,055]

I haven't seen this much anti-war sentiment from locals and troops/vets in my lifetime. We have schools who are trying to kick military recruiters out, and for good reason. Simply put, if people can't enlist on their own volition, rather than have the military harass them for getting low grades, maybe think of a better premise for using your military. The fact that recruiters have to trick people or specifically target certain groups is enough of an insinuation as to how "honorable" I find it.

California dreamin again. How close are you to Santa Cruz? There have always been recruiters and you need those guys unless you'd like to see a draft instead. How exactly can the military harass students with low grades? Who exactly are the groups targeted for requirement?

1. The military has access to phone numbers of students. They can call them unless they opt-out. This I had to notify the local newspaper on as parents were getting tired of their kids being contacted by recruiters.

2. In our high schools around here we have career centers which help students figure out which scholarships and plans they want. If a recruiter happens to overhear someone suggest they have low grades, they go on the attack. This I experienced, myself, which greatly turned me off from military service, and I had even planned on continuing the family tradition. Thankfully I was wise enough not to fall for it.

3. The groups are mainly poor people, minorities, and people with low grades. If you've even kept up on news in the last half decade, you've seen why military recruiting has been under fire.

There are constant clashes in the Bay Area between military recruiters and anti-war protesters. In Santa Cruz, SF, and Berkeley, namely.

Edited November 10, 2008 by SRVT

[S and S 12]

I haven't seen this much anti-war sentiment from locals and troops/vets in my lifetime. We have schools who are trying to kick military recruiters out, and for good reason. Simply put, if people can't enlist on their own volition, rather than have the military harass them for getting low grades, maybe think of a better premise for using your military. The fact that recruiters have to trick people or specifically target certain groups is enough of an insinuation as to how "honorable" I find it.

California dreamin again. How close are you to Santa Cruz? There have always been recruiters and you need those guys unless you'd like to see a draft instead. How exactly can the military harass students with low grades? Who exactly are the groups targeted for requirement?

1. The military has access to phone numbers of students. They can call them unless they opt-out. This I had to notify the local newspaper on as parents were getting tired of their kids being contacted by recruiters.

2. In our high schools around here we have career centers which help students figure out which scholarships and plans they want. If a recruiter happens to overhear someone suggest they have low grades, they go on the attack. This I experienced, myself, which greatly turned me off from military service, and I had even planned on continuing the family tradition. Thankfully I was wise enough not to fall for it.

3. The groups are mainly poor people, minorities, and people with low grades. If you've even kept up on news in the last half decade, you've seen why military recruiting has been under fire.

There are constant clashes in the Bay Area between military recruiters and anti-war protesters. In Santa Cruz, SF, and Berkeley, namely.

I had high grades in high school. I wasn't rich by any stretch of the imagination, probably closer to poor, but they did come recruit me and I wasn't harrassed. I guess it depends on the area you are in.

[IAMX 3,055]

I haven't seen this much anti-war sentiment from locals and troops/vets in my lifetime. We have schools who are trying to kick military recruiters out, and for good reason. Simply put, if people can't enlist on their own volition, rather than have the military harass them for getting low grades, maybe think of a better premise for using your military. The fact that recruiters have to trick people or specifically target certain groups is enough of an insinuation as to how "honorable" I find it.

California dreamin again. How close are you to Santa Cruz? There have always been recruiters and you need those guys unless you'd like to see a draft instead. How exactly can the military harass students with low grades? Who exactly are the groups targeted for requirement?

1. The military has access to phone numbers of students. They can call them unless they opt-out. This I had to notify the local newspaper on as parents were getting tired of their kids being contacted by recruiters.

2. In our high schools around here we have career centers which help students figure out which scholarships and plans they want. If a recruiter happens to overhear someone suggest they have low grades, they go on the attack. This I experienced, myself, which greatly turned me off from military service, and I had even planned on continuing the family tradition. Thankfully I was wise enough not to fall for it.

3. The groups are mainly poor people, minorities, and people with low grades. If you've even kept up on news in the last half decade, you've seen why military recruiting has been under fire.

There are constant clashes in the Bay Area between military recruiters and anti-war protesters. In Santa Cruz, SF, and Berkeley, namely.

I had high grades in high school. I wasn't rich by any stretch of the imagination, probably closer to poor, but they did come recruit me and I wasn't harrassed. I guess it depends on the area you are in.

It sure does.

[alienlovechild 75]

The military has access to phone numbers of students. They can call them unless they opt-out. This I had to notify the local newspaper on as parents were getting tired of their kids being contacted by recruiters.

It's pretty easy to hang up if you're not interested. That's what I did when they called when I was a high school student. Hell, I had a recruiter call me when I was in grad school at the age of 39. I told 'em, "You guys must be getting desperate. Isn't there anybody under 30 worth recruiting?"

2. In our high schools around here we have career centers which help students figure out which scholarships and plans they want. If a recruiter happens to overhear someone suggest they have low grades, they go on the attack. This I experienced, myself, which greatly turned me off from military service, and I had even planned on continuing the family tradition. Thankfully I was wise enough not to fall for it.

Yeah, better to let those losers flip burgers instead.

3. The groups are mainly poor people, minorities, and people with low grades. If you've even kept up on news in the last half decade, you've seen why military recruiting has been under fire.

"Now the conservative Heritage Foundation has analyzed enlistee demographics by looking at household incomes in the zip codes recruits come from. The results indicate a pool of recruits drawn mainly from the middle class. The largest group of new recruits in 2003--18 percent--came from neighborhoods with average annual household incomes of $35,000 to $40,000, compared to a median household income of $43,318. In all, the top two income quintiles (comprising households with incomes starting at $41,688) produced 45 percent of all recruits in 2003. A mere 5 percent came from neighborhoods with average incomes below $20,000 per household."

https://www.reason.com/news/show/33276.html

So much for the poor but the number of minorities in the military doesn't seem out of whack compared the U.S. as a whole either. That's why there's no comparison to combat deaths by race a al Vietnam War.

http://www.heritage.org/research/nationals...ty/cda05-08.cfm

There are constant clashes in the Bay Area between military recruiters and anti-war protesters. In Santa Cruz, SF, and Berkeley, namely.

I thought so. Not surprising at all.

Edited November 10, 2008 by alienlovechild

[S and S 12]

I always wondered what the point of harrassing military personnel was all about. They don't make policy or any of the decisions, they just serve and do what they are told. Most recruiters are given that job against their will and if they don't meet quotas it can ruin their career. Harrassing military doesn't change anything. Maybe going to D.C. and protesting or lobbying would be more useful, at least in my opinion.

What do those people think? We can just disband the military? Makes no sense to me, but perhaps someone can enlighten me.

[Scott & Lai 12]

The military has access to phone numbers of students. They can call them unless they opt-out. This I had to notify the local newspaper on as parents were getting tired of their kids being contacted by recruiters.

It's pretty easy to hang up if you're not interested. That's what I did when they called when I was a high school student. Hell, I had a recruiter call me when I was in grad school at the age of 39. I told 'em, "You guys must be getting desperate. Isn't there anybody under 30 worth recruiting?"

2. In our high schools around here we have career centers which help students figure out which scholarships and plans they want. If a recruiter happens to overhear someone suggest they have low grades, they go on the attack. This I experienced, myself, which greatly turned me off from military service, and I had even planned on continuing the family tradition. Thankfully I was wise enough not to fall for it.

Yeah, better to let those losers flip burgers instead.

3. The groups are mainly poor people, minorities, and people with low grades. If you've even kept up on news in the last half decade, you've seen why military recruiting has been under fire.

"Now the conservative Heritage Foundation has analyzed enlistee demographics by looking at household incomes in the zip codes recruits come from. The results indicate a pool of recruits drawn mainly from the middle class. The largest group of new recruits in 2003--18 percent--came from neighborhoods with average annual household incomes of $35,000 to $40,000, compared to a median household income of $43,318. In all, the top two income quintiles (comprising households with incomes starting at $41,688) produced 45 percent of all recruits in 2003. A mere 5 percent came from neighborhoods with average incomes below $20,000 per household."

https://www.reason.com/news/show/33276.html

So much for the poor but the number of minorities in the military doesn't seem out of whack compared the U.S. as a whole either. That's why there's no comparison to combat deaths by race a al Vietnam War.

http://www.heritage.org/research/nationals...ty/cda05-08.cfm

There are constant clashes in the Bay Area between military recruiters and anti-war protesters. In Santa Cruz, SF, and Berkeley, namely.

I thought so. Not surprising at all.

Uh, oh, you quoted the Heritage Foundation...get ready for the attacks...

[IAMX 3,055]

It's pretty easy to hang up if you're not interested. That's what I did when they called when I was a high school student. Hell, I had a recruiter call me when I was in grad school at the age of 39. I told 'em, "You guys must be getting desperate. Isn't there anybody under 30 worth recruiting?"

Doesn't refute the fact that people get bothered.

Yeah, better to let those losers flip burgers instead.

At least they can opt out of that and find a better job. No PTSD there.

"Now the conservative Heritage Foundation has analyzed enlistee demographics by looking at household incomes in the zip codes recruits come from. The results indicate a pool of recruits drawn mainly from the middle class. The largest group of new recruits in 2003--18 percent--came from neighborhoods with average annual household incomes of $35,000 to $40,000, compared to a median household income of $43,318. In all, the top two income quintiles (comprising households with incomes starting at $41,688) produced 45 percent of all recruits in 2003. A mere 5 percent came from neighborhoods with average incomes below $20,000 per household."

https://www.reason.com/news/show/33276.html

So much for the poor but the number of minorities in the military doesn't seem out of whack compared the U.S. as a whole either. That's why there's no comparison to combat deaths by race a al Vietnam War.

http://www.heritage.org/research/nationals...ty/cda05-08.cfm

http://www.militaryfreeschools.org/PDF/Hon...0Newsletter.pdf

Junior Reserve Officer Training Corp (JROTC), touted as an educational

program by schools and the military alike, serves as little more than an

intensive recruiting tool through which largely low-income children are

enticed by a sense of exceptionalism, comradeship and patriotic zeal.

∙ Often acting in consort with JROTC programs, recruiters make their

presence known at school and district-wide sporting events where

conversations about physical prowess can be easily turned toward options for

military service.

∙ Military "Adventure Vans" and other specially outfitted vehicles tour the

country with weapons simulators, high tech video presentations, and cadres

of highly trained recruiters who present themselves as educators.

∙ With a strong presence at career fairs, recruiters are able to attract

students who lack direction or academic prowess, or may be intimidated by

the financial burden of a college education.

And again..

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,79770,00.html

WASHINGTON - Most military recruits in the United States come from areas in which household income is lower than the national median, a non-profit group says.

Nearly two-thirds, 64 percent, of recruits to the military were from counties that have average incomes lower than the national median National Priorities Project said. The group looked at Department of Defense data for 2004.

According to NPP, 15 of the top 20 counties that had the highest numbers of recruits had higher poverty rates than the national average, and 18 of the top 20 had higher poverty rates than the state average.

The U.S. military has long been considered a step away from economic hardship, a trend that is apparently continuing.

Military recruiting officials contend money is not the only reason people join the military, since it also attracts those looking for an opportunity for public service, travel, and structure and discipline.

.. can go all day if you like.

I thought so. Not surprising at all.

Of course not. These people are quite respectable, care about their community, and actually care about their country. Some believe that blindly serving is honorable. I think that it's disgraceful. I think actually finding out relevant information, like on Stop-Loss, would certainly be advisable, so someone gets the idea that once they're in the service, they better be ready for as many deployments and involuntary contract extensions as the government sees fit.

Here's why I don't trust recruiters, and anyone here with kids shouldn't trust them either, if what they want are honest reasons to join the military:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/05/20/...ain696991.shtml

CBS News has reported that from asking teens to lie to their parents to guiding them through duping the drug-test system and forging documents, recruiters will go to many lengths to get young people to enlist. One Houston-area recruiter was caught on tape threatening jail time if an applicant didn't keep his appointment.

Each Army recruiter must enlist two people a month into the service. But the Army is 6,600 recruits behind where it wants to be at this point in the year, leaving questions whether the service will be able to fill every position needed to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Opinion surveys suggest that an increasing number of potential recruits and their parents are wary of the Army's recruiting pitch while soldiers are dying in Iraq.

Rochelle says recruiters taking shortcuts in recruiting "is simply not acceptable," CBS News reports. Almost 100 recruiters have been admonished and another eight have been relieved of their duties.

Rochelle said one problem has been with what the Army calls "influencers" — parents, coaches and others — recommending military service less often than they once did. After the Sept. 11 attacks, these influencers were likely to recommend military service 22 percent of the time, he said; now, Army studies show that figure has dropped to 14 percent.

Bring it.

Edited November 10, 2008 by SRVT