US Army Recruiters: "Iraq War Is Over"

Originally posted by Baphomet79
No, the Corps is centered around the tradition that every Marine is a RIFLEMAN, not Infantry.

0311 Rifleman

No, the Corps does has Infantry. Like I said, 03 is the occupational field for infantry and from there you have specific jobs (MOS). While every Marine is rifleman first, no matter what job, the core of the Corps is the Infantry. All other MOS's support the infantry.

[edit on 6/11/2006 by SportyMB]Enlisted Job Descriptions

Infantry Marines are trained in core competencies of gunnery on infantry weapons, combat operations, and battlefield awareness; employing a variety of weapons, and through communications links, supporting arms including artillery, naval gunfire, and close air support; sea-based, projecting onto vital littorals in any climate or place.

03 - Infantry
Infantry: Occupational Field 03



[edit on 6/11/2006 by SportyMB]

[edit on 6/11/2006 by SportyMB]

It will probally never be over

It will probally never be over

Does it realy surprise anyone that recruiters lie? It doesn't realy matter because once they sucker you into the military you no longer have any constutional rights and the only protection you get is the UCMJ which can have you shot for falling asleep on guard in theater.
The realy funny thing is that most of the people who join are poor and have no other choice but to go in to pay for college and would join either way, they want a better life only to lose thier life in Iraq all in the hopes of being good little boys and getting thier degree so the can have 2.5 kids and a wife that sleeps with the mail man.
What a load of BS we put into these kids heads that gives them so little options with thier lives.

Recruiters reflect the lies that they have been fed by this adminstration.

They are hurting for recruits in the face of another national guard call up
and all the negative stories about Rumsfeld isn't changing minds.

Army Times - Time for Rumsfeld to go
Navy Times - Rumsfeld must go’
Air Force Times - Rumsfeld must go
Marine Times - Rumsfeld must go

Truth has become irrelevant when crooks run the show,
and here comes the December surprise:

Possible Iraq Deployments Would Stretch Reserve Force Washington Post
Army reserves brace for more call-ups Houston Chronicle
New call-ups of Army's reservists to Iraq Seattle Times

i must ask the obvious:

why would you sign up to join the US army if you don't intend to fight???

sure it pays well for college, but still

i wonder what these kids were expecting

i am not defending anyone, i am just wondering...

Alright, my apologies, I aproach MOS' from an Army standpoint. Guess it is the same as 11-A being Infantry officer, and 11 being Infantry designation. Although the Army is the real Infantry.

Just kidding, I have 3 cousins in the Corps right now, 2 in OIF.

Originally posted by Baphomet79
First off RockPuck, how can you be suckered into joining the Marines, into the Infantry, to work with Helicopters? Infantry and Helicopters are two completely different MOS', and Marines are not Infantry.

My story, I actually had my Army recruiter lay it out for me as plain as day what I was getting myself into. But I actually wanted to be an 11-A Infantry Officer. He didn't lie to me because I wanted it, but he did well...."coach" me on a few of my forms.

My Grandfather was a USAF Station Commander (whatever you call it in the Air Force,) and they even went as far as posing a morbidly obese girl in her graduation gown to fool the camera when her packet was reviewed.

Well, I was going to be given a rifle, then be flown in by a helicopter and dropped into action... which in my book is infantry with a fancy way of getting around.. and far from being a Coast Guard helicopter pilot.. and I never joined I saw through his Bs?

Originally posted by DooMHearT
It doesn't realy matter because once they sucker you into the military you no longer have any constutional rights

What a load of crock. Military men and women have all the rights as every other American. The only difference is whenever excersing the 1st Amendment to voice anything political (either in favor or against...Bush sucks, Kerry's a traitor, etc..you get the point) they have to make sure to not do it in any official capacity, ie: not in uniform, etc...

and the only protection you get is the UCMJ which can have you shot for falling asleep on guard in theater.

Again, uninformed hogwash. People in the military have the bill of rights, just like all Americans.

Do you have one example of someone being shot for sleeping on post? And don't bring up some trash back in 1862 or Vietnam...I mean recent. Times have changed my friend....you need to catch up.

Maybe you should look up the stats on education in the military.

Google

[edit on 6/11/2006 by SportyMB]

I have served as 11H in the US army 97-00 101st 2/327th and I am here to tell you when you join the military you are not covered by the constitution period.
You are subject to UCMJ code and thats it to say anything else is a flat out lie.
Now wether or not you are shot or if you just get extra duty for falling asleep on guard duty is a whole different story but the fact that under UCMJ you could be is the point and the fact is you can be.

Originally posted by DooMHearT
I have served as 11H in the US army 97-00 101st 2/327th and I am here to tell you when you join the military you are not covered by the constitution period.

Have you had any personal experiences that led you to think that? There are MANY military members speaking out against Iraq, which is not a violation under the UCMJ or the Bill of Rights.

law.freeadvice.com...

Does the u.s. constitution apply to military personnel?

Sort of, but not exactly the way it does in civilian life. While military personnel are not excluded from the rights set forth in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution grants Congress the power to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces.

As a practical matter, most civilian Constitutional rights are afforded to military personnel - although with some differences to fit the military situation. In some areas, such as right to counsel and rights (Miranda) warnings, military personnel have broader protections than those contained in the Constitution. In other areas such as search and seizure, they have reduced expectations of privacy and fewer protections.

Military appellate courts tend to interpret military law as being consistent with Constitutional protections so far as is possible.

There are also people in the military that get charged and convicted in civilian trials, and that's while they're on Active Duty.

So I guess, military members do get the same rights that civilians have. With just a few differences that are mentioned above.

You are subject to UCMJ code and thats it to say anything else is a flat out lie.

True, military members are subject to the UCMJ.....and you also have the BoR to protect you.

[edit on 6/11/2006 by SportyMB]

Originally posted by Baphomet79
No, the Corps is centered around the tradition that every Marine is a RIFLEMAN, not Infantry.

0311 Rifleman

Semantics, I know despite it is an almost identical job (but Infantry/ Rifleman working with helicopters, huh?, that was my point). I am very proud to live in a country defended by the history and tradition of the Marine Corps.

I don't think you need to explain the Marines to Grady.

As to the topic, yeah recruiters lie. As Skadi mentioned, the stories you hear in BCT are sometimes hilarious. "They promised I wouldn't have to go to boot camp..." That's technically true, since the Army doesn't have "boot camp", but it's no less a lie. Recruiters lie. When you get asked your copout questions (have you used drugs, have you been convicted, etc...), the motto is NO = Numerous Opportunies, YES = Your Enlistment Stops.

Now, as to who's struggling for numbers....I don't think the Marines are ever hurting for people, usually they are turning people away. The Army, however, is and has been for some time needing people.

But as has been mentioned, anyone with a TV and/or a set of ears knows that the "war" isn't over, regardless of how you'd like to label it. It was bad of the recruiters to lie, but anyone enlisting in the Army should have some idea.

depending on what is said by military personnel in theatre it can be considered anywhere from treason to just being against protocol ecspecialy when it concerns those above you in your chain of command.

Military appellate courts tend to interpret military law as being consistent with Constitutional protections so far as is possible.

Interpret is the key word here a military court determines that "interpret" part, they are not going to tell you your not covered by the constitution they candy coat it's just another way of saying "UCMJ is what we follow and if it appears constitutional then great".
A person in the military can come under civilian courts if the crime is commited off federal reserve territory i.e. personell commiting crimes in foriegn coutries being tried by that countries courts however this is a courtesy of our goverment to that country since if we wanted we could just send them back state side.
Let us not confuse things though when in the military you are literally goverment property and although you do have some rights in the military they are interpreted by your commanding officers with little or no over sight by anyone who is directly concerned about your well being excluding death or dismemberment.

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
""We're not at war. War ended a long time ago," another recruiter says. "

That is a true statement.
We are not "officially" at war with Iraq now and have not been for a while now.

I wonder, if someone is lied to, can they get out of the military that way-sort of a breach of contract sort of thing????

Oh, c'mon. Seriously. This is not genuine.

WOW this is scandalous!

Charges pending for these recruiters? I wonder if the recruiters receive bonuses for recruiting more people ?

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
WOW this is scandalous!

Charges pending for these recruiters? I wonder if the recruiters receive bonuses for recruiting more people ?

No charges, but if reported to the proper authorities the recruiter will be investigated and may be sent back to the fleet (or Iraq). Recruiter bonuses are not monetary but can lead to awards and sometimes a promotion. Failing to reach goal, though, is absolute hell.

Good coments one and all,
I agree with those who say that recruiters have always "distorted the truth."
I must be hard to make students believe the hogwash though.
When Bush declared victory in Iraq,he was lying too.
So I still think the recruiters were lying.
I still think if recruits were told more of the real deal,the army would only get the better soldiers-who know exactly what they are getting in to.
Seems foolish to lure kids into the forces under the premise that they won`t have to fight.

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
US army recruiters were caught on tape blatanetly lying to students about the situation in Iraq.

This is nothing new. Recruiters LIE. They always have and they probably always will.

When I went into the Army I asked about going Airborn. This was the early 1980s and I used to go sky diving and thought it would be good to use my skills in an airborn unit. The recruiter said ... sure you can go.

Well, once I'm in basic training I asked the drill sgt, and my C.O., about airborn and was told that girls couldn't go. They also told me that skydiving and going airborn were two different things (and I found out that they are).

I was also told by the recruiter that I could pick my duty stations. So I picked Mass for CONUS and Egypt/Middle East for overseas. Instead of those I got sent to Texas and Japan (which wasn't bad).

Recruiters lie. And if anyone signs up in the military thinking the war in Iraq is over then they haven't been watching the news or reading the paper.

Originally posted by SportyMB
Maybe you should look up the stats on education in the military.

Stats on US Military personnel. Including education levels. Upon entry 100% of enlisted have a high school diploma or GED. The US civilian population for the same age has an 89% high school diploma or GED holding. The US troops are actually better educated upon entry into the Armed Forces than the general US population. (and many go on to get their college education after enlisting in the military - like I did)

www.dod.mil...

Officers have a much higher college degree rate than civilians of the same age population.

www.dod.mil...

With all the coverage in the news about Iraq...if any kid falls for that line then perhaps Kerry was right all along.

Be that as it may, thats just plain wrong.