Terrorists and sex offenders can join military.

Geez, you really do read alot into what I post. Once again, do I say that it's OK for US troops to behave that way? No, I don't. What I'm trying to get across is that out of the thousands of US troops that have been in the AOR, how many have behaved in such a manner as you are accusing them? A very, very small percentage. Does the small percentage make it OK? Nope, it doesn't.



You're right. I did go off topic. Your initial post made it sound like that rape and mayhem were some sort of accceptable activities for US troops. I asked you to come up with some sort of regulation or instruction that the US military uses to train troops in rape, murder, etc. So far, you haven't come up with anything.

You mean guys like this:

www.heroes.com...

Hmm sounds like a good way to bolster a depleted army in a time of war. Heck under the terrorist charges, most if not all enemy combatives would qualify for service?

I know, let the US invade some third world country, imprison thousands of their men, then give them an ultimatum "fight for us or rot in our jails!". Oh wait they already doing all the above (minus the ultimatum)

Could be just the thing needed to take war to Russia or China.

Um...no. I do not mean guys like that. Great, you can show me a reformed military gang member. Awesome. I can show you a shark not attacking a human within reach as well. Care to come with me on a dive some time? I mean, I can prove beyond all doubt that there are sharks that will not eat you. That means none will right?

Seriously. There is a difference between disparaging the military and respecting it. If you respected it, you would not ignore that bad seeds and pretend that every good soldier cancels out the bad ones.

The bad ones make America look bad and less safe. The bad ones make more people want to kill people wearing that uniform.

In short, bad soldiers make things worse for good soldiers and the country. Do you care enough about the good soldiers to acknowledge that bad ones are in there with them? Or would you rather post another website about another good soldier for no reason?

Never once have I said that there are no good soldiers, nor that the majority are bad. What I am saying is that you people that pretend there are NO bad soldiers getting in are doing a great disservice to our brave men and women in uniform. Ignoring the problem helps perpetuate it.

Anyone willing to risk their life and take another life to protect me, deserves to be surrounded by nothing but the best, most honest and moral people we can find. To throw one rapist, drug addict, current gang member, or any other less than upstanding citizen into any group of any size is to put them at greater risk.

Is that what you really want? You want to show us a good soldier so that I will say, "Oh ok, nevermind." And we just let the criminals keep making things worse for the real soldiers? Seriously, is this the argument you are making?

Or is it like the others, there are just so few rapes, murders, and acts of terrorism against innocent people. that is really should not matter. Guess what? It matters to the people that woke up and planned on farming that day and now, can be very easily convinced to take up arms against the invading U.S. force by being shown just ONE example of what one bad soldier has done.

Bravo to you for being brave enough to stand up for the rights of the men and women in uniform that put bigger targets on the backs of their fellow soldiers. You must be a true patriot to decide that more dead soldiers is better than admitting that our military recruiting practices leave a little to be desired.

Did you not just say that I read alot into things? I never once said it was instruction or regular policy. I said it happens PERIOD.

Ask me to prove some other stuff I did not say so you can gloat about how I still have not proved what I never said to begin with. Your friend that keeps starring your posts must not read them.

Sorry, I can not and will not prove things that I never claimed are true to begin with.

How about you prove to me that I said the military enforces, instructs, or teaches these practices.

Didn't think so.

What you aren't seeing is that it is impossible to keep rapists out of the military if they have never raped and gotten caught before. It is impossible to keep a drug addict out if they are clean when they go to MEPS to enlist. It is impossible to keep out a gang member who doesn't have gang tattoos and has never committed a crime and gotten caught. It would be great if we could keep all the potential bad seeds out, but the plain fact is we don't know who they are if they haven't been convicted of anything prior to enlisting.

Right, I am so sorry. The only ones getting in are the ones with NO criminal record and clean urine right? The system is working best it can against these sneaks right?

Of course it cannot be perfect but they could at least try, just a little.

Look at this thread. What happens when a bad apple act out in the military? People call you a liar for bringing it up and say you hate the military for proving it happened. I get called anti American because I do not like the idea the brave good men and women are dying becuase scumbags wearing the same clothes are out there creating new enemies every day. When someone commits a crim in the milirty what happens? You don't hear about it until someone messes up. Then you see how it was covered up and hidden. Does that sound like vigilance to keep out criminals to you? How many enemie kills on our men have turned out to be suspiciously grouped or located friendly fire? Pat Tillman was enough but not the first or the last by a long shot.

I appreciate what you are saying and it has its point. Unfortunately you seem to be watching this war through the lens of American Media. Try looking a little deeper. Just look at how many criminal acts have been found to have been once covered up.

I know someone will resond telling me how rare it all is and I am hating the military so let me cut you off at the pass.

If it happens ONE time, that puts our men and women in more danger. That is one time too many. Can we make it perfect? No. Could we try a little harder? Sure seems to be the case so far.



[edit on 14-11-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

I know I posted it in this thread, and I have linked it in my signature. No one with a felony is getting in. No one with a history of sexual crimes is getting in, not even domestic abuse. Yes, some people with no criminal record do get in and then do horrible things. With 1.3 million people total in the US military, it is a matter of statistics that you are going to have some with no criminal record that end up committing a crime. And no, their crimes should not be covered up. They should be dealt with according to the UCMJ and discharged if the crime is severe, as should anyone found to be trying to cover up a crime. Is it horrible that there are people committing crimes after enlisting? Yes it is. Is there any way to predict who is going to? No there's not. It's only after they have committed a crime that they can be dealt with, and they should be. But to expect there to not be any potential bad seeds in the military is to dream of a utopia that does not and will not ever exist.

Sure there is. They know who you are before they give you live ammo. They know you are a former gang member. They know you are a pervert. They know you have evil in your heart. Not always but to pretend that the do not let in gang members or people with gang affiliations is crazy. Apparently I was proven wrong with such a poster child. Tell me, how many known gang members enter the military and become that young man compared to how many either commit crimes in the military or bring the traing back home to commit crimes?

If it ratios is anything other than 1 hero and NONE Of the others, then sorry BUZZZZZZZZZZZ wrong. Known gang members are allowed in and you know that. But I guess these are severely vetted gang members with no felonies or rape convictions?

No one with a felony? Really? Then who are those felony waivers going to?

Really? So the instructors at basic know if someone has evil in their heart? They know if someone is a pervert? Please enlighten me how they know that. Someone who has no criminal record, but the instructors at basic know what they will become someday.

And just because someone was formerly in a gang does not mean that they have not changed and aren't good people now, nor does it mean that they have killed or raped anyone.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

Did you even read the link I provided? Or the info I quoted? Or heck, any of my first post in this thread? Please call your local National Guard recruiter first thing tomorrow, tell them you have a felony and that you were told you are not eligible to join and that you want to know if it's true. The rules have changed. You used to be able to get a waiver for certain felonies and under certain circumstances, but you can no longer get in with a felony. Marines, Navy and Air Force I am not 100% certain about. But in the National Guard and Army a felony is a no go.

Damn, my bad. It was ukuli that initially posted a BS response:

"As I said before, gang-rapes and terrorism have always been a part of warfare."

And when I asked him/her to come up with some proof of US troops being trained in this manner, you suddenly jumped in with the "I'll get youtube videos of US troops being bad guys" response.

Looks like I was just as guilty of not reading the whole post as much as you were.

I think what really pisses people off is that the same "bad apples" are brought up time and time again, and it's used to paint the US military with the same broad brush.



Compared to how many US troops have been in Iraq, it is rare. And no, it doesn't make it right. (Geez, I know I've written that at least twice.)

Did you seriously just waste an entire paragraph to tell me how ignorant I am for not checking my facts and then end it by saying you have no idea if it applies to the Marines, Navy, or Airforce???????

You do know they are military right?

Seriously, get over yourself. So you are 10% sure that a felon cannot get into the national guard. Ok, and what point does that make or prove again?
Do some more research before getting so uppity. Or should I remind you of how you just ended your little rant about how ignorant I am????



Besides, I believe I was still talking about gang members and the criminals we know are in there now. Do not tell me what to reread when you repost it and it stil does not make your point, especially when it is clear you are not paying attention to what you are even respondng to.

Just be clear, what are you trying to say again? It is a good idea to fill our ranks with lowlife scum? I have a drug dealer, a rapist, and someone of just low moral character. No arrests but we can tell who they are. I am more than happy to give them all weapons and send them into battle with you. Hope you think they will make the best team possible then since you want them in so baddly. Sound like a good idea yet?

Then what are you trying to prove?

Who painted the military with this broad brush?

I did NOT!

So you agree this does not make it right? Then what are you arguing?

LET ME TRY THIS ONCE MORE SINCE YOU ALL CANNOT GET IT.

THE MAJORITY OF MEN AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM ARE GOOD PEOPLE.

I DO NOT LIKE THEM DYING BECAUSE THEY WERE MADE TO STAND SIDE BY SIDE WITH IMMORAL CRIMINAL TYPES.

Sorry if I want the people dying for me to get the best we have to offer them in tools and team members. That is just what I feel they deserve. I guess you all feel they do not deserve as much and that is why you are so fervantly sticking up for the few people that make it less safe for all of us then.

Whatever folks. You all want bad people in the military because you know you will not be in a war zone having to depend on them and also have their back any time soon right? It is ok it 10 good men get blown up because one bad guy had to shoot at farmers for fun right?

I concede, you all win. It is ok to shoot at civillians driving through town. And when the familes of the people shot seek revenge against anyone with an American flag on, that is ok, it is rare right?

So in your twisted logic, saying that I can't be 100% sure about the Marines, Air Force or Navy means my information about the Army and National Guard is incorrect even though the link I have provided repeatedly on here has to do with the Army and National Guard? Seriously?

And I am 100% sure a felon can't get into the National Guard. Or was that a typo on your part? I've already done my research. Not my fault if you choose not to accept it.



And you were implying that criminals are still being enlisted when they are not. Again, not my fault if you choose not to accept that.



I have made my position clear. Not my fault if you choose to skip over that and try to pick apart things you don't like.

Did I say it was a good idea to fill the ranks with lowlife scum? Please show me where I did and then I will respond to the rest of this little self-righteous tirade.

Ummm...NO. I was talking about the military as a whole, not two specific branches. My logic is that you cannot tell me that your knowledge of those two specific branches applies to the military as a whole. Try reading what I write instead of just reacting.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

Perhaps you should take your own advice since all you have done so far is pull out one sentence and react to that instead of reading the whole thing.

Still waiting for you to show me where I said we should fill the ranks with low-life scum.

No. I am flat out saying it. Implying nothing. Criminals are getting into the military. You said "NO FELONS ARE BEING ADMITTED TO THE MILITARY."

Aside from denying that, what I said was that by the time they get a gun, they know if the person is a gang member or criminal type, criminal record or not, clean urine or not. At this point, the people that should have been weeded out because of these discovered tendancies are instead handed that gun and sent out to battle.

Please, feel free to just pick apart the parts you want to argue with as well. I see it works both ways. You want to say the military is running itself perfectly and being ever vigilant in who it hands live weapons to. I want to say it can do a better job of vetting these folks out before they are put in the field.

You really want to argue that the standards are as good as they can be? Really?