Military recruitment in schools

Hey guys, is this article a fair reflection or over the top. My school days are over. I must say it sounds somewhat disturbing if true.

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

Here's a few exerpts.

With a military recruiter present every day in the cafeteria, military "speakers" visiting classrooms, and huge recruiting posters in the guidance office, perhaps it's not surprising that teachers and even guidance counselors have been influenced by the constant hum of "enlist, enlist, enlist". Students at Isa's school are told that, yes, they could consider college, but that it's "very expensive" and "may not guarantee you a job", while the military "will pay for college" and "practically guarantees you'll have a great career". Oh, and "a big cash bonus right now if you sign up today!"
......
"We have to watch this short thing every morning in homeroom called "Channel One News"," Isa explained with a weary tone. "It's educational, supposedly. You know, the day's news, so we'll be up on current events. But in between the stories, there are more and more ads for the Army and the Marines."


[edit on 21-2-2005 by Romeo]

they did that when i was in 11th grade, years b4 the first golf war.

that article itsef is biased as hell. when they tried to recruit me, i just quite simply said no and went on with my life.

i cannot speak for everyone, but this generalization is pretty realistic IMHO:

"the more you try to force a teenager to do something, the less likely it will be for him/her to do it"

thats why i never played football even though im bigger than most pro ball players, they tried to froce it on me. totally disregarded my needs as a human being to make th 'team' better. i saw right through that then just like i see through the war propaganda today.

Though that article is clearly baised and has a agenda.

Yeah whats so bad about what they said? They are not lying college is very expensive and it does not guarantee you a job. The military will pay for college as well and you can get a sign on bonus.

I mean I dont see any false information in there? RecruiterS have been going to schools for along time. In my school we had the ASFAB military test or something like that everyone took it because you got out of classes if you did. They never pushed anything down your throat if you weren't interested. But if you did have a interest they were more then happy to help.

Im just glad we dont live in a country where we have a 2 yr mandatory military service. Many countries do just that.

well how about this:
The recruiters cited the No Child Left Behind Act, President Bush's sweeping new education law passed earlier this year. There, buried deep within the law's 670 pages, is a provision requiring public secondary schools to provide military recruiters not only with access to facilities, but also with contact information for every student -- or face a cutoff of all federal aid. ............!!!!!!!
Recruiters are up-front about their plans to use school lists to aggressively pursue students through mailings, phone calls, and personal visits -- even if parents object. "The only thing that will get us to stop contacting the family is if they call their congressman," says Major Johannes Paraan, head U.S. Army recruiter for Vermont and northeastern New York. "Or maybe if the kid died, we'll take them off our list."

www.motherjones.com...

I'm not saying these articles are not biased against recruitment but they do make valid points or at least raise valid questions. Should children be indoctrinated at an early age with a military ethos and thereby expect military service at some stage to be a normal part of their lives. The military has seemingly unlimited funds and will approach an enlistment campaign like any other...ruthlesslessly. You have an interest in ANYTHING.....We have the JOB for you! ...you see, you cannot escape. You have an interest or a skill, they'll hook you and reel you in. Get em early.... young, dumb, poor, and malleable. Its religion, make no mistake.



[edit on 21-2-2005 by Romeo]

I remember seeing recruiters at school and taking the ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery) - more than 15 years ago. I did well enough to get recruitment calls from several services. I remember saying a lot of things to the recruiters that I now regret. I maintained that arrogance in college, but eventually dropped it after a few years of grad school.

Some colleges have attemped or enacted bans of ROTC units on campus. IMHO, if a school bans military recruiters, they should be precluded from any govt. research funding. That probably isn't a big deal for social science and humanities depts. but it would likely send a chill through many chemistry, physics & engineering depts.

In fact, there aren't many jobs like the military for folks with no ambition or plans for their future. What other industry offers entry level employees without a college education full benefits, clothing, food, housing, retirement, and clear promotion opportunities? Plus, there are plenty of specialization choices that do not involve deployment to the warzone.

Originally posted by ChemicalLaser
Some colleges have attemped or enacted bans of ROTC units on campus. IMHO, if a school bans military recruiters, they should be precluded from any govt. research funding. That probably isn't a big deal for social science and humanities depts. but it would likely send a chill through many chemistry, physics & engineering depts.

In fact, there aren't many jobs like the military for folks with no ambition or plans for their future. What other industry offers entry level employees without a college education full benefits, clothing, food, housing, retirement, and clear promotion opportunities? Plus, there are plenty of specialization choices that do not involve deployment to the warzone.

But don't you think its a small step from "mandatory military recruitment in schools or you lose funding" to mandatory military school for everyone.

I just can't see how that will improve the education system.

ASVAB's are and have been given in high schools for decades.

In and on college campus', military recruiters should have every right to have a booth or space to recruit. Most to all college campus' announce and hold "career days" where many upon many employers, state, federal, and local come to "recruit" prospective juniors and seniors. If they can do "recruiting" then why cannot the military?

I'm not seeing a real issue here other than its the military thats doing the "recruiting."




seekerof

[edit on 21-2-2005 by Seekerof]

lol. you don't think cutting off of a schools federal funding if they don't comply is a big issue? Its blackmail. I find the loud support fascinating.

[edit on 21-2-2005 by Romeo]

Excuse me? Blackmail? Unlikely

How so Romeo?
The majority of school funding comes from the state level anyhow, not the government.
This might help?
School Funding FAQ—Frequently asked questions about public school finance

This is applicable to all states and not just a specific one.




seekerof

"Under the President's education plan, No Child Left Behind, the schools get federal funding in exchange for this information.

Had the San Francisco Unified School District declined, it would have lost $36 million in federal funding this year. "

abclocal.go.com...

Extortion.

Just to explain further:
Here is the average breakdown:

State: 44+/-%
Local: 48+/-%
Federal: 7+/-%
*Source is from, Donald Kauchak and Paul Eggen, Intro to Teaching: Becoming a Professional, 2nd ed. (New Jersey: Pearson Education, 2005)

This site has a graph and further information also that may prove helpful, as well:
School Finance Overview





seekerof

[edit on 21-2-2005 by Seekerof]

so your saying that the federal funding is not needed by most schools and the removal of 7% of a school's funding would hardly be noticed? Extortion in the Land of the Free.

[edit on 21-2-2005 by Romeo]

Obviously your definition of extortion is quite different from what the sources indicate, huh?

Tell you what....
You debate the links and source information I gave you, k?
The information speaks abundantly for itself.
Your belief is your own, despite the evidences standing in stark contradiction to and of what you are continually implying.




seekerof

[edit on 21-2-2005 by Seekerof]

I did debate your link. You just don't like it. A school WILL comply to just about anything to avoid having 7% of it funding removed (as per YOUR LINK).

Originally posted by Romeo
I did debate your link. You just don't like it. A school WILL comply to just about anything to avoid having 7% of it funding removed (as per YOUR LINK).

Um no, youre quite misinformed on that. 7% of funding can easily be generated in other ways. federal education spending is a very small portion of a total school budget. Schools are more concerned with other forms of funding.

I was recruited in the army, but hardly by coersion. The recruiters show up, off the asvab for interested parties. If youre not interested, you dont take it.

The recruiters got my number from a friend, not from the school. They got his number because he went in and asked about the military and such. he decided he didnt want to join but knew I was interested, so he gave em my number. Which I was.

I dont see any evidence of coersion here. If the federal govornment is giving money to a school, federal money, this also means the school should also comply with federal policies and agencies. if the school has a problem with it, then why should the federal govornment give them money?

Federal money is seldom sued for education, but often to set up extra administration, something schools can do without anyway.

Originally posted by Romeo
A school WILL comply to just about anything to avoid having 7% of it funding removed

Seems fair. If they want federal funding, they need to conform to federal standards. What may not be fair about it is that anytime federal funds are withheld, all citizens of that state should deny the federal government access to their paychecks.

It’s real simple. If you accept federal funding, you are making yourself part of that federal program, and must conform to their rules. If you do not accept federal funding, you are not part of their system and they have no legitimate claim of control over you. Same goes with any federally funded program, like roads. The state of Louisiana refused until recently to raise its drinking age from 18 to 21. Because of that, Louisiana's roads went to hell for lack of federal funding. But, that is what the people of Louisiana wanted, and they accepted it for a long time. The drinking age was raised to 21 after a period of "rebellion" on the part of the state, and federal funding has been restored.

Anyone who does not want recruiters in their children’s school needs to either pull their children from public schools, or work toward the abolishment of public schools altogether. Whining about it will get you nowhere.

My input,story of my country.

Things such as this is quite normal in my country.Military recruitment in schools are an option for students who are interested in having a military career for their future.Moreover,the incentives given by these military programmes are quite helpful and generous.The programme is called SAF(Singapore Armed Forces) Borne programme.

What you will receive:
1)Your education is fully paid by the military
2)You get monthly allowance
3)You get cash incentives for passing your examinations

By doing so you have to:
1)At least serve another 2yrs of military service besides the 2yrs compulsory national (military) service,hence 4yrs with the military.

Well,I don't know about other countries but I find it to be helpful to anyone who has big dreams being in the military service.Furthermore,they don't force you or influence you to join the military here in Singapore when you're at school but when you reach 18 to 21,it's compulsory to undergo the 2yrs national (military) service.For the case of in U.S,I know you guys have no 2yrs compulsory military service so it's more of a volunteer-type of work though I find it weird they are drumming it into your head to join the Army.

[edit on 22/2/05 by Heartagram]

I don't see the problem here. If a school receves federal funding it has to allow the federal military to recruit, so what?
Whats the big deal? Fine some liberals in the educational system dslike the military as a matter of principle so what, the only reason they have the abillity to dislike the military is because of the sacrifices of soldiers from previous generations. Whats wrong with an army, marne recruiter going to a high school or college to recruit? Where the hell else are they going to go? The military needs to recruit young soldiers, the only place they can be guaranteed to be able to reach America's at is the school system.


Liberals remember, a soldier is the guy who protects your abillity to hate war.

MWM - THIS quote from you is GREAT! I love it!
'Liberals remember, a soldier is the guy who protects
your abillity to hate war.'

When I was in high school 30 years ago we had recruiters
come to our school. They had a table in the cafeteria with
information. ALSO there were people from the local hospital,
some of the teachers, the town vet, the town dentist, some
of the colleges, etc. etc. etc. All sorts of folks had their tables
set up and we could take information (or not) from each place
to see if anything was interesting to us. These folks stayed
for 2 days or so and were there to answer questions and help
17 and 18 year olds in their decision making process for after
high school. I found it very helpful and informative.

Firstly , there are many left wing soldiers and many right wing.
Secondly why should the federal gov , if it gives any funding, be allowed to show one side to an arguement?
Cause They want more soldiers, what for? To wage war.
Simple, name one war where america has went on the defensive in the last 50 years.
War on terror was a simple attack and counter attack nothing mroe.
I didnt see any US battle groups getting pulled back from global positions.