Big mouth syndrome

[Gato_Solo]

Im just wondering if they want recruiting stopped so bad, what are they gonna do when all the people start getting out and we are left with a military might of hmmm, lets say france. that will be real smart. but hey, just let them start the bombing there first, gives me time to get dug into the hills.

They don't care.

 

[flavio]

Too bad he said the exact opposite before the war, right?

See post #12

So you advocate a draft?

No, I never said anything of the sort.

18 year olds are not kids.

Are you reading the same thread as me? See post #15.

No. But not every town has a recruiting office. That's why we have to go to the schools. Not to mention the way most of the teachers view the military is a constant reminder that some people shouldn't breed...

Recruiters don't have to go to schools. First off San Francisco has recruiter offices. Second recruiters often visit potential recruits homes. Third most recruiters are a constant reminder that some people shouldn't breed.

 

[Gato_Solo]

See post #12

Sure...after the voting started.

No, I never said anything of the sort.

So how are recruiters going to get access to the young adults? There are only two ways.

Are you reading the same thread as me? See post #15.

Yep. Just different points of view.

Recruiters don't have to go to schools. First off San Francisco has recruiter offices. Second recruiters often visit potential recruits homes. Third most recruiters are a constant reminder that some people shouldn't breed.

1. Niether does any other type of recruiter, but they get a free pass, because they are private, right?
2. And why should San Francisco be penalized because they have an office, and some poor town in the country doesn't.
3. They have a job to do, just like you do. While I don't agree with their tactics, I also don't envy them their jobs because of statutes like the one you so fervently defend. Instead of making it easier, and eliminating the bad apples, they do their best to create more...and you happily agree with them.

 

[Gonz]

...or that Iraq poses a significant challenge to U.S. interests. There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.

We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction...

There is clearly a threat from Iraq, and there is clearly a danger...

All that while crying against the War in Iraq.

He isn't alone.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

Feb. 4, 1998, Message from President Clinton to the Senate:
The policies and actions of the Saddam Hussein regime continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, as well as to regional peace and security.

Mar. 12, 1998, Joe BIDEN:

No one should doubt for a moment the resolve of the United States to respond with force, if necessary, to Iraq’s continued flagrant violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions.

now stop with the it's all Bushs fault crap. It can be debunked, easily. If you chose to disagree with it, fine. However, saddam was a problem & a threat for some time & Bush did something about it.

 

[flavio]

So how are recruiters going to get access to the young adults? There are only two ways.

If someone wants to join the military they call or visit a recruiter.

1. Niether does any other type of recruiter, but they get a free pass, because they are private, right?

No, the only recruiters that visited my high school that I saw were military. If there are other types visiting some schools I wouldn't object to doing away with them either.

2. And why should San Francisco be penalized because they have an office, and some poor town in the country doesn't.

I don't see how San Francisco is being penalized. They have recruitment offices and their keeping recruiters out of the schools. They're in good shape.

3. They have a job to do, just like you do. While I don't agree with their tactics, I also don't envy them their jobs because of statutes like the one you so fervently defend. Instead of making it easier, and eliminating the bad apples, they do their best to create more...and you happily agree with them.

Who am I happily agreeing with?

 

[flavio]

now stop with the it's all Bushs fault crap. It can be debunked, easily. If you chose to disagree with it, fine. However, saddam was a problem & a threat for some time & Bush did something about it.

What did Bush do about this "threat"?

 

[Gonz]

If someone wants to join the military they call or visit a recruiter.

Suppose somebody has spent their entire life listening to those like you who hate the military & they don't really understand, beyond the brainwashing. They may love it, given an opportunity to find out.

What did Bush do about this "threat"?

You hadn't heard?

 

[flavio]

Suppose somebody has spent their entire life listening to those like you who hate the military & they don't really understand, beyond the brainwashing. They may love it, given an opportunity to find out.

I don't hate the military.

You hadn't heard?

So Bush is responsible for the war in Iraq. Glad we got that cleared up.

 

[Gonz]

Just like JFK was responsible for Vietnam

 

[flavio]

You want to expand on that correlation? This should be entertaining..

 

[Gato_Solo]

If someone wants to join the military they call or visit a recruiter.

Not an option. If you have private industry dropping by for job fairs, and colleges actively recruiting, then you have no moral authority to keep out the military. If someone wants to get a job, or go to college, they can call, or visit the college.

No, the only recruiters that visited my high school that I saw were military. If there are other types visiting some schools I wouldn't object to doing away with them either.

Ahh...so those students who got college scholarships for football, grades, et al, were never seen in their school environment.

I don't see how San Francisco is being penalized. They have recruitment offices and their keeping recruiters out of the schools. They're in good shape.

By not allowing a visit from the local recruiting office, they lose the ability to have their best and brightest exposed to what could be a life of service to their country. After all...the teachers there have been exposing them to their 'anti-military' drivel for 12 years. Are they so afraid of 4 people that they deny them access?

Who am I happily agreeing with?

Those who would keep military recruiters out of schools. If you notice, no other groups were mentioned.

 

[Gonz]

You want to expand on that correlation? This should be entertaining..

either you's with us er yer ag'in us

Wait, that the 00's simplified version. Here's Kennedys version

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

 

[flavio]

Seems like your whole arguement revolves around military recruiters being denied access while other groups are not.

In my experience this isn't much of an issue. I never even heard of any other type of recruiters at my high school although military recruiters where there often.

I also had a recruiter hassling me on the phone periodically even though I told him I wasn't interested. He even came by my house uninvited. He was so damned persistant he had to be working on commission or something.

I also got alot of offers and information from colleges but it all came in the mail.

This all amounts to a community deciding that military recruiters has become an issue and they shouldn't be allowed in the school trying to influence the direction of their childrens lives. That is their right. If some other group becomes a problem they can ban them too.

For instance if a large strip club was there recruiting the hottest girls maybe the community has a right to ban them too if they don't want their children exposed to that.

After all...the teachers there have been exposing them to their 'anti-military' drivel for 12 years.

That's a pretty unfounded assumption. I never heard a single teacher discourage anyone from joining the military.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Seems like your whole arguement revolves around military recruiters being denied access while other groups are not.


In my experience this isn't much of an issue. I never even heard of any other type of recruiters at my high school although military recruiters where there often.

Yep. In most cases, college scouts (for sports), and recruiters for academic scholarships are given free reign to go to the schools. Happened in my High School every year.

I also had a recruiter hassling me on the phone periodically even though I told him I wasn't interested. He even came by my house uninvited. He was so damned persistant he had to be working on commission or something.

I also got alot of offers and information from colleges but it all came in the mail.

This all amounts to a community deciding that military recruiters has become an issue and they shouldn't be allowed in the school trying to influence the direction of their childrens lives. That is their right. If some other group becomes a problem they can ban them too.

If they don't like the military, then, perhaps, they should remember one very important thing...the military is the only defender of their idea to deny them access to their child. As long as that child goes to a public school, funded by federal dollars, then any branch of the government has a duty to try and recruit those children. Since the other departments like college graduates, then that leaves the DoD. If they are that adamant about their child staying out of the military, they can always write a note to the teacher/principal, saying that their child is forbidden to attend. Then again...that would make sense, wouldn't it?

For instance if a large strip club was there recruiting the hottest girls maybe the community has a right to ban them too if they don't want their children exposed to that.

Ahh...nothing like an example that is illegal to make your argument that much more valid, eh? If you can't think of something else legal to ban, then you must admit that your argument is not valid.

That's a pretty unfounded assumption. I never heard a single teacher discourage anyone from joining the military.

I have...on more than one occasion in High School, and just about every day in College. Not outright, mind you, but little jabs at the 'military-industrial complex' which 'siphon billions of dollars per year out of the economy just to justify their own existance".

 

[flavio]

Yep. In most cases, college scouts (for sports), and recruiters for academic scholarships are given free reign to go to the schools. Happened in my High School every year.

Oh well. Wasn't an issue in my school. I don't even see how it would make sense. Sports scouts can go to the sporting event to watch as can any member of the public. Academic scholarships would probably want academic records to send info to the right people. Anyway, certainly couldn't hurt to keep them out too.

If they don't like the military, then, perhaps, they should remember one very important thing...the military is the only defender of their idea to deny them access to their child.

They don't have to dislike the military to want to keep people from trying to recruit their children during school. I don't dislike the military but I'm against it.

As long as that child goes to a public school, funded by federal dollars, then any branch of the government has a duty to try and recruit those children.

They have all the commercials and the literature they send out. Don't need them in the school. 1-800-USA-ARMY....goarmy.com...etc.

Since the other departments like college graduates, then that leaves the DoD. If they are that adamant about their child staying out of the military, they can always write a note to the teacher/principal, saying that their child is forbidden to attend. Then again...that would make sense, wouldn't it?

Makes sense the way they did it.

Ahh...nothing like an example that is illegal to make your argument that much more valid, eh? If you can't think of something else legal to ban, then you must admit that your argument is not valid.

What's illegal about the example?

 

[Gato_Solo]

Makes sense the way they did it.

That's where we will disagree.

What's illegal about the example?

The 'adult entertainment' business is controlled by the state, and as such, can only go where the state permits.

 

[flavio]

The 'adult entertainment' business is controlled by the state, and as such, can only go where the state permits.

Hey, military recruiting in schools is now controlled by the city. How similar.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Hey, military recruiting in schools is now controlled by the city. How similar.

1. The federal government pays part of that tab at school. They can make a good case, everywhere but the 9th circuit court, about that...even to the extent of withdrawing their monetary support. Guess the city needs to pull their heads out.

2. It's not similar because your example is a private, for profit, business (strip clubs).

3. I really resent you comparing the US military to a private business in general, and a strip club in particular.

 

[chcr]

I really resent you comparing the US military to a private business in general, and a strip club in particular.

Strip clubs are more profitable and the girls are frequently more attractive.

 

[flavio]

1. The federal government pays part of that tab at school. They can make a good case, everywhere but the 9th circuit court, about that...even to the extent of withdrawing their monetary support. Guess the city needs to pull their heads out.

If the government pays part of the tab it does not give the military free reign over the school....and there's no court in the land that would make children's education suffer simply because recruiters aren't allowed to pimp their wares in the school. The rest of the country should pull their heads out and follow suit.

2. It's not similar because your example is a private, for profit, business (strip clubs).

You used a job fair example earlier. It has nothing to do with profit or not. It's about parents taking control over whether outside influences are allowed in their children's school to try to affect the course of their lives. Something parents should certainly have control over.

3. I really resent you comparing the US military to a private business in general, and a strip club in particular.

It's a great example. Maybe you can see why parents wouldn't want strip club recruiters in the school (even if they made large donations). If parents don't want military recruiters in the schools they have that right as well.

One of those jobs is much more likely to get your kid killed and the other one pays better.