"Studies for the Army show parents are the top obstacles (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usatoday/20050405/ts_usatoday/armymarinerecruitersshiftfocustowaryparents) to recruiting. "Opposition to ... military service is increasing significantly among both moms and dads," says a study of 1,200 potential recruits by the firm Millward Brown."

*

Gee.........I wonder if they've visited The Jebber (http://www.hereinreality.com/gonewild.html), yet??

He's got some fine, upstanding assault-artists in his house!!!

http://www.hereinreality.com/etc/georgepbush.jpghttp://www.hereinreality.com/etc/jebbybush.jpg


http://www.whitehouse.org/images/gs/draft.gif

I totally agree. Draft the little Bush Whores!!!

I remember my first day at Allforums, I made a post about why not just send the Bush Whores over there...But I remember someone saying that would only result in a full whole nation draft...

Get a load of this shit:
+++++++++++++++++

They're Talking Up Arms
Military recruiters are fortifying their outposts at high schools, hoping a chummy familiarity will entice students to enlist. Some decry the tactics.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-recruit5apr05,0,5875265.story?coll=la-home-headlines

----snippet----
The guide instructs recruiters to deliver doughnuts and coffee for the school staff once a month; attend faculty and parent meetings; chaperon dances; participate in Black History Month and Hispanic Heritage Month events; meet with the student government, newspaper editors and athletes; and lead the football team in calisthenics. It lays out a month-by-month plan to make recruiters "indispensable" on campus. The booklet states: "Be so helpful and so much a part of the school scene that you are in constant demand."

It advises recruiters to get to know young leaders because "some influential students such as the student president or the captain of the football team may not enlist; however, they can and will provide you with referrals who will enlist."

------snippet-----

Students held pamphlets and key chains from an Army recruiting table several yards away. They picked up T-shirts and hats from the Marines.

Carloss asked them to fill out cards with their name, address, phone number, age and grade. Students must be at least 17 to enlist. Those younger than 18 need parental consent.

"Are you scared?" Carloss said jokingly to one boy.
Carloss waved down a girl: "Go to one of these boys over here who you think is cute and tell him to do it."
"Who?" she replied.
"I don't care," Carloss said, "as long as he's 17."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
These assholes are now pretending to give "friendly advice" on joining the military. And bribing school employees favor with coffee and dougnuts.

There no way this guy in teh article made enough in the military to buy a mercedes, a motorcycle and a house. What a dispicable lying prick.

He pretends like joining the military is safer than walking down the street. I dont care where you live but theres no way 9% of the people are disabled from violence (not to mention all the soldiers killed).

Did you burn down the house of Shaman?
:banana:

I think this is just a conspiracy to kill off a few hundred teens so the population will go down a tee bit.

people that complain about recruitment AND the draft are idiots. unless you believe in not having a military at all, we need to fill the ranks somehow.

Like the song says "be the first one on your block to have your kid come home in a box".

Trav, the way to fill the ranks is by having people in charge who actually give a damn about the troops. People who will not send them off to die in wars of choice. People who will not back door draft them or cut their benefits.

Trying to get people to sign up to die for this rediculous war is insane, considering they are cutting benefits, and keeping the poor guys lifes in ruin by continuel deployment.

Originally posted by Travh20
unless you believe in not having a military at all, we need to fill the ranks somehow.
Hey.........they could enlist some o' those big, bad, threatened gunslingers, from Jebberland!!!!! (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/04/05/deadly.force.ap/index.html) :@@:

There no way this guy in teh article made enough in the military to buy a mercedes, a motorcycle and a house. What a dispicable lying prick.

This guy here is an E-7 with lets say 14 yrs of service, lets see how much he makes a year;

Base Pay - $3,3332.40
Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) for LA - $2,079.00
Basic Allowance for Substance (BAS) - $267.18
Recruiter Pro Pay - $375.00

That makes his monthly pay $6,053.58 and $72,642.96 annually before taxes. And the BAH and BAS are non-taxable.

And in all fairness it does say it's a 96' Mercedes. So it's reasonable to assume it's paid off.

So yea, I bet he does have all that stuff and a nice saving account to boot.

As as you know I always like to back my claims with a source, you should try it sometime.

http://www.dod.mil/dfas/money/milpay/pay/

So he's not a dispicable lying prick. You're just grossly uninformed and make baseless statements.

WTF parent wants their kids to sign up knowing it's a lifetime gig.

These parents probably don't mind the kids doing a couple of years but an entire lifetime ... Uh-uh ... they want to see the kids have successful careers, quality of life, family-orientation (read grandchildren) .... you know the drill.

Besides ... didn't the AWOL pres declare the war was over?

Why the hell are they trying to recruit more kids to die when the big tough texan in the oval office has already declared "mission accomplished". Or was that just another one of his lies?

The Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq (H.J.Res. 114) was a resolution passed in October 2002 by the United States Congress authorizing what was soon to become the 2003 invasion of Iraq under the War Powers Resolution. The authorization was sought by U.S. President George W. Bush, and it passed the House by a vote of 296-133 and the Senate by a vote of 77-23, receiving significant support from both major political parties. It was signed into law by President Bush on October 16, 2002.

By Congress passing the resolution it authorized the US to invade Iraq without the declaration of war, since this falls under the War Powers Resolution. This is the basis the government is arguing and winning in court concerning the "Stop Loss" program.

I find it so interesting the Monday morning quarterbacks who say "I vote for the authorization for force but I did not want to use it." Well dumbass you should of never voted for it in the first place then.

Dop, personnally I don't like the Stop Loss program, I'm just laying out the facts of its legallity. I don't want a disgruntled soldier or marine carrying around a gun.

The question is ...

Did congress declare war on Iraq? Yes or no

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
The question is ...

Did congress declare war on Iraq? Yes or no

No, it did not. I will give you that.

But will you admit that the war is not illegal in that congress voted and overwhelming approved the use of force. And the President had the legal right to deploy troops under the War Power Resolution of 1973. The administration did not send troops without the approval of congress.

I will give you the war powers act but in reality, under that same act ... bush could have gone in without congressional approval for 90 days so there really was no real reason not to pass the resolution.

Sorry GW, I will never admit this war is legal.

Originally posted by GW_Rules
The administration did not send troops without the approval of congress.

Agreed. But they lied to congress to get their aproval.

OK, now I understand. Your claim that the war is illegal is based on personal opinion (which many many people share that opinion) not a legal one. OK, no problem.

No Iraq connection to 911

No Iraq connection to Al Quida

No yellocake

No centrifugal tubes

No wmd's

No lauch vehicles

No ability to hit us within 45 minutes

No harboring terrorists

Now, just where did this administration not lie to setup the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq?

You see at as the administration lying. I do not agree. If in fact there are no weapons of mass destruction, which is still questionable in my opinion, then the government did not lie, they were just misinformed. Here are a few quotes on Sadaam's weapons program, some of them before Bush even took office. The rest of them by Democrats after Bush took office. And some of these people really hate Bush.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if
appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass
destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin,
Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his
weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition,
Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the
cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will
threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,)
and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and
a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and
chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I
believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is
a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

Sorry to make it the long. But I could of posted more. As you see, it was long believed that Sadaam had WMD by even the Democrats. And other countries as well. Even Kennedy, Clinton, and Kerry believed that based on the intelligence that was available at the time. So I say that the government did not intentionally lie, they had bad intelligence that dated back to the 90's.

Here ya go -- even republican congressmen are aware of the lies and want an apology from bush for taking us to war.

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=13180

here's the Yahoo link ...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050408/wl_mideast_afp/usiraqcost&cid=1514&ncid=1473

and the Wash Post link ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32440-2005Apr6.html

These mofos owe me an apology too -- for doing this in my name.

Americans are waking up to the fact bush took us into Iraq on lies.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=6674

Give it some time and you'll be standing alone GW_Rules

READ THIS INTERVIEW:

This is an edited transcript of an interview conducted by Ian Masters with Vincent Cannistaro, the former CIA head of counterterrorism operations and intelligence director at the National Security Council under Ronald Reagan, which aired on the Los Angeles public radio KPFK on April 3, 2005.

A former counterterrorism chief claims that the now discredited documents that showed Iraq trying to purchase uranium were fabricated right here in the United States.

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/21704/

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The problem was that they had no intelligence. When there are no real sources they up and ran with whoever was singing their tune no matter how untrustworthy.

Basically Rummy had direct control over the "intelligence" on Iraq because it was collected through the DIA. Most democrats are part of the scam (like Kerry saying he would have invaded Iraq a whole different way) and those that arent had to rely on the intelligence produced by Rummys DoD. Im not defending the democrats. Just saying that Rumsfeld had direct control over the 'evidence' they used to make those remarks.

Of course Iraq was looking for weapons. Just like every other asshole coutry in this world. Its the rare exception to find a country that is not seeking weapons.