Senior high school girls get information at a special forces booth to recruit noncommissioned officers in a job fair for high school graduates at a Seoul convention on Aug. 31, 2016. (Yonhap)
The Economist has an article published that discusses why the US military has had a hard time recruiting and how military generals have too much power:
Seasonal factors, including a strengthening labour market and negative media coverage of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, have widened the gulf. So have the dismal standards of education and physical fitness that prevail in modern American society. At a time of post-war introspection, these factors raise two big questions. The first concerns America’s ability to hold to account a military sector its leaders feel bound to applaud, but no longer competent to criticise. Andrew Bacevich, a former army officer, academic and longstanding critic of what he terms the militarism of American society, derides that support as “superficial and fraudulent”. Sanctified by politicians and the public, he argues, the army’s top brass have been given too much power and too little scrutiny, with the recent disastrous campaigns, and similarly profligate appropriations, the almost inevitable result. The second question raised by the civil-military disconnect is similarly fundamental: it concerns America’s future ability to mobilise for war. [The Economist]
You can read the rest at the link, but according to one military official the amount of obese potential recruits is the biggest recruiting challenge currently. As far as the military brass having too much power, I would also disagree with this, they are executing the strategy given to them from the White House. If strategy is flawed the military campaign will be flawed as well. As far appropriations Congress is just as much to blame as the military brass who help keep flawed acquisitions programs going because of the jobs they provide in their district.
Has anyone else noticed that the fact that the US military met their 2007 recruiting goals is hardly mentioned in the media? Back in August I called the media’s attempts to politicize the fact that the active duty Army did not meet their June and July recruiting goals a “False Recruiting Crisis” and the final statistics prove me right.
Could you imagine what the headlines would be if the military did not meet their recruiting goals? I think we all know the answer to that one.
Now here is my prediction for headlines next year. In 2008 the military is going to have a hard time making the recruiting mission because of the plan to expand the force. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates shares my concerns:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday that he is “inclined to approve” an Army request to cut a year off of the five-year plan to expand the active-duty force.
“I’m probably going to recommend that they go ahead and give it a try,” he told reporters during a Pentagon press conference.
However, Gates said, “my questions are focused principally on whether they can do it, in terms of recruitment, and whether they can do so without lowering standards.” [Stars & Stripes]
To increase the Army by 74,000 soldiers over five years means that the Army would have to recruit at most an additional 14,500 soldiers a year. This number can be off set by the number of re-enlistments which I think will continue to be strong. However, recruiting next year is going to be tough because of the January announcement to further expand the military. If the military does not meet the recruiting goals expect sensationalized media reports with little no context about the expanding of the military. Additionally it’s an election year and the final recruiting stats will be released a month before the presidential election.
So I fully expect the Democrats to jump on this as an example of a “broken military” as they have in the past. Remember next year that you heard it here first; to expect the politicization of US military recruiting numbers in 2008.
I have long chronicled the misinformation campaign being waged by the media in regards to US military recruiting and today the Associated Press has again offered another dubious article about recruiting. To be fair this article is by far not the worst I have seen, but it is still pretty bad. Check out how this article begins:
Need a down-payment for your home? Seed money to start a business? The Army wants to help — if you’re willing to join up. Despite spending nearly $1 billion last year on recruiting bonuses and ads, Army leaders say an even bolder approach is needed to fill wartime ranks. […]
An Associated Press review of the increasingly aggressive recruiting offerings found the Army is not only dangling more sign up rewards – its loosening rules on age and weight limits, education, and drug and criminal records.
By just reading the opening paragraphs of this article you would think the Army is throwing a bunch of money to recruit elderly, obese, uneducated, criminals because of the war in Iraq. Does this line of reasoning sound familiar? Well it should because I have long demonstrated how the left and their media allies have been doing everything possible to label soldiers as uneducated, low life, criminals responsible for committing war crimes all over Iraq and are not worthy of the nation’s respect. This AP article is clearly keeping in tune with this leftist narrative. The only thing wrong with this narrative is that it is not true, but since when has the media been concerned about facts? Perception is all that matters and this article is one in the long line of articles trying to create negative perceptions of the US military through dubious reporting.
Now after leading people on that there is a recruiting crisis due to the war in Iraq that is requiring the military to throw all this money at a bunch of elderly, obese, uneducated, criminals, the AP writer suddenly admits that the military is on track to meet this year’s recruiting goals:
In June, the Army failed to meet its recruitment target for the second month in a row, although it apparently met its goal to recruit 9,750 troops in July and is on target for 80,000 for the year that ends Sept. 30.
Notice the sneering “apparently met its goal”, no not “apparently”, the military did meet their recruiting goal. Not only is the military on target to meet recruiting numbers for the year, but the numbers are actually above the needed percentage. But once again since when has the media been concerned about facts? Obviously not Kimberly Hefling from the AP who wrote this article.
So what exactly is this expensive program to throw money at obese, uneducated, low lives you may ask? Well, just one of the best recruiting ideas since the GI Bill in my humble opinion:
The Army would like to start a pilot program targeting 500 people who might not otherwise considering joining. In the pilot, the takers who complete a 4-year enlistment would be eligible for up to $30,000 in incentives — including money for a home loan or business. Eventually, the Army wants to offer up to $45,000.
This is a fantastic idea and yet the AP writer from the start of the article has made this program out to be something that is intended to recruit obese criminals. Since when have criminals been concerned about getting a down payment for a home? This program is going to appeal to whole different class of people who maybe don’t want to go to college or maybe have already gone to college, but they know that in four years they could not save up the $45,000 for a down payment on a home that the Army is offering.
Instead of insinuating that this program is intended to recruit obese criminals, the AP writer should be highlighting the great ingenuity of this program, but that doesn’t fit the leftist narrative, thus readers are lead to believe obese criminals want a down payment for a home mortgage. This is the type of ridiculousness that passes as journalism in the US now a days.
Believe it or not, the article actually gets better before it ultimately gets far worse. More than half way through the article Hefling actually includes some facts that probably has more effects on recruiting than the Iraq War:
Beyond the Iraq war, the military says other factors have affected its ability to recruit. More high school graduates are going to college, and the economy is strong, providing lots of civilian jobs. At the same time, only three of 10 people between 17 and 24 fully meet the military’s standards.
Less obvious factors have also decreased the recruitment pool. They include higher obesity rates, more people diagnosed with mental health conditions such as attention-deficit disorder, more criminal citations due to the increase of the drinking age from 18 to 21.
“The numbers of people who meet our enlistment standards is astonishingly low,” said Michael Dominguez, principal deputy undersecretary of defense.
Wow, this seems like some pertinent information that should have been in the front of the article and not towards the end. By reading this it is clear that this new recruiting program was designed to compete against a strong economy offering good jobs to potential recruits and not uneducated, low life criminals.
At least the AP writer actually allowed some facts to actually seep into the article which is why I said in the beginning of this posting that it wasn’t the worst posting on recruiting I have read; usually the journalists just leave out such facts all together. This journalist just decided to bury the facts, but at least she included them.
However, not to far after actually offering some real facts, our AP writer has decided to delve back into the realm of fiction again:
Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said her organization is concerned that low-income young people and minorities are targeted by recruiters and lured with promises into making decisions they would not otherwise have made.
The old recruiters are targeting poor helpless minorities claim again. I don’t know how many times I’m going to have to keep shooting down this ficticious claim, but here I go again. Let’s go back to the land of facts instead of conventional wisdom. The facts are that recruiters are actually recruiting less blacks than in years past. Guess who is taking the place of potential black recruits? You guessed it, white recruits! Is the AP going to write an article condemning the “targeting” of white recruits by the US military any time soon? I think we all know the answer to this question.
What is even more ridiculous about this claim is that the military is offering low income and minority kids a college education and a down payment on a home is some how a bad thing. I suppose Ms. Lieberman would prefer these kids go on government programs where for their whole lives they are dependent on people like her to ensure they keep getting their free hand outs. How dare the US military do something like offer these kids a college education, a down payment on a home, job skills, and leadership training that would break this cycle of government dependence that many low income minorities find themselves in?
Of course Hefling wraps up her whole absurd article by going back to the narrative that their is a recruiting crisis caused by the Iraq War, which I have already pointed out in great detail there isn’t:
It’s not just the attitudes of young people that have seemingly shifted. In 2005, statistical surveys revealed that because of the Iraq war, adults who work with students were less likely to suggest joining the military.
“The willingness of coaches, teachers, counselors and parents to commend military service to America’s youth is lower than is good for our nation and our military,” said Dominguez, the Defense Department official.
The journalistic incompetence of the AP continues with no end in sight.
Just for the record, the facts clearly show that military recruits are smarter, increasingly middle class, (even the numbers of wealthy enlisting is up) and the number of poor and minority recruits are dropping with more whites joining and the overall numbers are nearing the make up of the average US population.
Facts are hard for the demagogues, the race baiters, and class warfare specialists to accept, but longer the War on Terror goes on, more the demographic make up of the US military is becoming a direct reflection of American society itself. What is so bad about that?
What you won’t see in the MSM:
Accessions
Goal
Percent
Here is something else that relates back to my prior posting about blacks and US military recruiting. Here are some samples of more of the myths of the “conventional wisdom” out there about the US military:
This stat just confirms my prior hypothesis that the military is not getting dumber as some people have claimed. Here is another popular myth:
Notice in the graph above that there is now more wealthy recruits than poor recruits and growing while poor recruits and decreasing. There is something you will not see in the MSM or a documentary by Michael Moore on anytime soon. Make sure you read the rest because the report dispels more myths with some great hard data.
The reason these facts will not make it into the MSM or ever be uttered by Michael Moore or any of the other race and class demagogues out there, is because it goes against the current effort to paint soldiers as uneducated low lives that are committing war crimes all over Iraq. I’m sure if you ask them though, they will tell you they support the troops; their actions say other wise.
HT: Greyhawk
