The Economics of a Volunteer Army

Uwe Reinhardt on the controversy John Kerry stirred up recently with his comments about the military:

Kerry Trips Over an Economic Truth, by Uwe E. Reinhardt, Commentary, Washington Post: There is no question that Sen. John F. Kerry owed our men and women in the military and their families the apology he offered this week. ... Truth be told, however, economics professors routinely instruct their students on the virtue of the all-volunteer army in language that comes dangerously close to Kerry's uncouth remark.

Here, for example, is how University of Rochester economics professor Steven E. Landsburg made the case for the volunteer army in his textbook "Price Theory and Applications." Under a military draft, he writes, "the Selective Service Board will draft young people who are potentially brilliant brain surgeons, inventors and economists -- young people with high opportunity costs of entering the service -- and will leave undrafted some young people with much lower opportunity costs. The social loss is avoided under a voluntary system, in which precisely those with the lowest costs will volunteer."

Only slightly more crudely put, the central idea underlying this theorem ... is that if a nation must use human bodies to stop bullets and shrapnel, it ought to use relatively "low-cost" bodies -- that is, predominantly those who would otherwise not have produced much gross domestic product... On this rationale, economists certify the all-volunteer army as efficient and thus good.

Small wonder, then, that even college students who ardently supported the invasion of Iraq and just as ardently favor "staying the course" in Iraq argue smugly that, instead of serving their country in uniform, they can serve it so much better in law school or by trading bonds for Goldman Sachs. I personally have heard this argument many times from hawkish undergraduates at Princeton University who would never dream of fighting in uniform for the nation they profess to love. ...

There is ample evidence that the elite now running America has grasped the economists' dictum. To be sure, the officer corps is drawn from the ranks of college graduates, and a tiny minority of college graduates do heed that call. On the other hand, it is well known that to fill the ranks of enlisted soldiers, sailors and Marines, the Pentagon draws heavily on the bottom half of the nation's income distribution, favoring in its hunt for recruits schools in low-income neighborhoods. Certainly few if any of Kerry's elitist critics on the right, all of them self-professed patriots, have served their country in uniform, let alone in battle; nor have many of their offspring.

One must wonder, for example, how many high officials in the administration have sons or daughters in the fray in Iraq or Afghanistan, how many members of Congress and how many of the ever-hawkish talking heads on Fox News. And, as far as I know, no young member of the wider Bush family is serving our country in the military or has done so in recent years.

None of this excuses what Kerry said. But it does point up the hypocrisy rampant among his critics, who have waxed almost hysterical over his remark. I do not recall these same critics, including President Bush, lapsing into similarly righteous hysteria when Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld only three years ago flippantly insulted legions of World War II and Vietnam draftees by labeling such soldiers of "no value."

Let me start with this statement:

On this rationale, economists certify the all-volunteer army as efficient and thus good.

Economists do not define efficient as good or bad. Given a particular measure of equity, an efficient outcome might be quite "bad." But that is not the main point I want to make.

Let me use economics to take this a step further because the argument presented above misses an important market failure, one known as "moral hazard" that can lead to inefficient outcomes. There are also other potential inefficiencies, as noted below, including a  distorted selection of recruits brought about by a divergence between personal and social costs of entering military service.

It is well-known that when the costs of an action do not fall on the agent making a decision, then the tendency will be to take on excessive risk. If a bank manager owns only a small part of the bank he or she manages and thus stands to lose very little if the bank fails, then there is an incentive to use deposits to make risky investments with big potential payoffs, or at least increase the number of risky investment in the bank's portfolio. If the risky investments pay off, the owner wins big, but if they lose, it's someone else's money (and, up to $100,000, the government covers the losses through FDIC, so the depositors don't generally lose either). A solution to this problem is capital requirements that force the owner/manager to share the costs of failure -- make the owner put up a large sum of money that will be lost if the bank fails.

If those who are in power are divorced, for the most part, from those who pay the costs of war, than a similar moral hazard problem exists, one for which there is no equivalent of FDIC. If those in power do not stand to lose as much as those doing the fighting, then there is reason to worry that risks might be taken that would be foregone if the costs were shared across the groups in society more equitably. If the children of the powerful are just as exposed to the risks of war as everyone else, then this is less of a worry.

There are other potential inefficiencies over and above the potential for excessive risk due to the presence of moral hazard. There is an argument for efficiency during war -- it would be sub-optimal to have ship captains and pilots as infantry, to have medics driving tanks and computer experts cooking dinner in the mess tent. We want resources allocated to their best use and that argument extends to the use of resources for military and non-military purposes. But if the son of a rich person is less likely to be exposed to the risks of war than the son of a poor person with equal abilities and equal value to society, then there is reason to question both the equity and efficiency of the selection process as well as worry about the potential for moral hazard as described above.

Just because the military uses its resources efficiently by allocating each to its highest valued use does not mean the set of resources it has available is selected efficiently. It is possible for the set of recruits to be sub-optimal, i.e. for the recruit selection process to be biased for or against selecting from particular groups, yet have the military use the recruits it gets as efficiently as possible.

For example, one problem is a potential divergence between personal and social opportunity cost. The uneducated, untalented child a wealthy person may have a very low social cost -- very low cost of military service in terms of foregone GDP -- yet face a very high personal opportunity cost due to their wealth. This person will not choose to volunteer even though it is socially optimal for them to volunteer ahead of a more talented and socially valuable poor person with a lower personal opportunity cost. If we are going to use "social cost" to define efficiency, then we need to be sure the selection process is faithful to this principle.

Comments

[maria]

Yes what inflamed the anti-Kerry group was that he uttered a nasty, unpalatable truth. You don't find many well to do lawyers or CPAs or whatever fighting in Iraq. On some topics Americans have become allergic to the truth. That's what a steady diet of lies can do to a people after a while.

[Bruce Webb]

I am a veteran. I am proud of my service. But I never forget that the reason I joined up in 1977 was because I couldn't get a job in that particular time and place and my two years of college got me in as an E-3 right off the bat. I was one civilian job offer away from being in the same moral seat as the 101st Fighting Keyboardists, instead I have a DD214 and I am not afraid to use it.

(What's a DD214? Well it is a secret weapon used to defeat the armchair warriors who supported, and in some cases still support this war.)

In the Cold War environment an all volunteer military made sense. All kinds of people ended up in the military for all kinds of reasons, but the reality was that whether you lived in Wyoming or East St. Louis as long as your criminal record was reasonably clean you could escape your dead end job or dead end town by walking into the recruiting office. At the very least the military would feed you, give you a bed, teach you a job and generally send you someplace people from your high school would never have a chance of seeing.

But all bets are off in wartime. It is one thing to join the military knowing they may be shooting at you one day, it is another to join knowing the will be shooting at you, and soon. The moral calculus changes. I didn't join the Navy to fight and die. I was prepared to do so if called upon, but I didn't sign up so as to get a chance to kill the Filthy Hun or the Toothy Nip, it was just that the circumstances aligned themselves in a way that made that my best economic opportunity at that particular place and time.

People that support this war but who won't commit themselves or their children on the basis that "I had other priorities" (Deadeye Dick) or because soldiers are just "servants of civil masters" (Bareback Sully) are moral cancers to be excised.

And I don't know when Landsburg wrote that book but this quoted line was cruelly revealing: "the Selective Service Board will draft young people who are potentially brilliant brain surgeons, inventors and economists". Yes it's wartime and people are getting grievous head injuries, by all means keep the brain surgeons safe where they can operate. Yes it's wartime and we can use all the clever inventions those inventors can come up with. Yes it's wartime and by all means lets keep those academic economists safe because ..... I admit that I am pretty glad that Keynes didn't end up pushing up the famous poppies in Flanders Field but the implied notion that economists are or should be a protected class comes pretty close to justifying the sneers the physicists were sending this way a couple of days ago.

"Oh my God the terrorists blew up Chicago!! Luckily all the economists were at a confernce in Buffalo. We are saved!!" The world is just not all that in to you guys.

[me]

Washington — Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) insists he didn't mean to imply that U.S. soldiers were academically challenged when he warned a college audience to keep up their studies so they don't get "stuck in Iraq."

His remark, though, echoed those of some critics of the all-volunteer Army, who contend that it relies heavily on the sacrifice of Americans who lack the educational and economic opportunities available to others.

A study released in September by the National Priorities Project, a policy research group based in Northampton, Mass., found that young men and women from families with household incomes ranging between $30,000 and $60,000 a year are over-represented in Army recruitment levels. As income levels rise above $60,000 a year, representation drops off steadily, the study showed.

The national household median income was $46,326 in 2005, and the study found the most highly represented families were those whose household income was between $40,000 and $55,000 a year. People from those families tended to join the Army at nearly four times the rate of youths from households with between $120,000 and $130,000 in annual income.

Yet in terms of education levels, 82.9 percent of the Army's enlisted force — those at the rank of sergeant or below — has a high school degree or equivalent. That's above the average of 78.8 percent for the population as a whole, according to 2005 U.S. census data.

"It's incorrect to say that they are average. In terms of education or aptitude, they are above average," said Beth Asch, a senior economist specializing in military recruitment with the Rand Corp. consulting firm.

As for officers, almost all — 98 percent — are college graduates, and four out of 10 have a master's degree or doctorate.

The Army also promotes advanced education for enlisted troops and officers, about 600 of whom received time off and financial support to attend graduate school this year in exchange for three years of additional service.

Among Army recruits who enlisted during the past year, 13.6 percent have some college education, according to Army Col. Bryan Hilferty, a Pentagon spokesman.

They have access to a number of programs, including the G.I. Bill, which provides up to $40,000 in tuition and room and board assistance for soldiers who opt to attend college. Under the Army's Loan Repayment Program, enlisted troops who attend college with the help of federal loans can opt to have the Army pay off up to $65,000 worth of those loans in exchange for military service, said Asch.

"The military screens people for aptitude and education and it offers a lot of opportunity to continue education," said Asch. "It's a facilitator of college — it can be."

Still, there are those who feel the burden of military service should be more equitably distributed.

"The overwhelming majority of them are from lower- to middle- income families," said Emile Milne, a spokesman for Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.).

Milne said Rangel, a high school dropout who enlisted in the Army and fought in the Korean War "so he could earn some money," has proposed legislation that would reinstate the draft. The bill — a similar version of which was rejected two years ago in a 404-2 vote — is pending before the House Armed Services Committee

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2006/11/02/NATMILITARY1102a.html

[me]

Army general issues appeal to keep military ranks filled

By Ron Martz
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 11/04/06

Americans need to get serious about the war against international terrorism and start encouraging more young men and women to join the military, a top Army general said Friday.

Lt. Gen. Russel Honore, commander of the First Army based at Fort Gillem in Forest Park, said in a speech at the Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Decatur that many people in the United States tend to let the events of their everyday lives overshadow the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"We need to remind people we are at war," Honore said.

Honore urged the audience of about 150, many of them veterans, to try to instill in youngsters a sense of service to the nation, no matter their level of education or economic background.

Honore did not mention Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) by name or his remarks earlier this week that many perceived as a criticism of the education level of the American military.

But in an obvious reference to Kerry, Honore said, "It's OK to join [the military] if they are from a rich family. It's OK to join the Army if they have a college degree, and many of them do."

Honore spoke at the dedication of a Blue Star Memorial marker on Clairmont Road in front of the medical center. It is the 105th marker in Georgia. The markers honor veterans and those serving in the military.

He praised those now serving and made special mention of the Georgia National Guard's 48th Infantry Brigade, which in May returned from a year in Iraq, during which it lost 26 soldiers.

"This is a war," he said. "Wars are serious and people die."

But because of the nature of the enemy, he added, it is important for Americans to understand what is at stake for the nation and to make concerted efforts to keep the ranks filled.

"We can't have a part of America say, 'Yes, but not my son or daughter.'"

http://www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/stories/2006/11/04/methonore1104a.html

[slink]

simple solution

execute three parallel civilians for every battle death

[me]

Nov. 3, 2006 — An ABC News undercover investigation showed Army recruiters telling students that the war in Iraq was over, in an effort to get them to enlist.

ABC News and New York affiliate WABC equipped students with hidden video cameras before they visited 10 Army recruitment offices in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.

"Nobody is going over to Iraq anymore?" one student asks a recruiter.

"No, we're bringing people back," he replies.

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

Last year, the Army suspended recruiting nationwide to retrain recruiters following hundreds of allegations of improprieties.

One Colorado student taped a recruiting session posing as a drug-addicted dropout.

"You mean I'm not going to get in trouble?" the student asked.

The recruiters told him no, and helped him cheat to sign up.

During the ABC News sessions, some recruiters told our students if they enlisted, there would be little chance they'd to go Iraq.

But Col. Robert Manning, who is in charge of U.S. Army recruiting for the entire Northeast, said that new recruits were likely to go to Iraq.

"I would not disagree with that," Manning said. "We are a nation and Army at war still."

Manning looked at the ABC News video of his recruiters.

"It's hard to believe some of things they are telling prospective applicants," Manning said. "I still believe that this is the exception more than the norm. … I've visited many stations myself, and I know that we have many wonderful Americans serving in uniform as recruiters."

Yet ABC News found one recruiter who even claimed if you didn't like the Army, you could just quit.

"It's called a 'Failure to Adapt' discharge," the recruiter said. "It's an entry-level discharge so it won't affect anything on your record. It'll just be like it never happened."

Manning, however, disagrees with the ease the recruiter describes.

"I would believe it's not as easy as he would lead you to believe it is," he said.

http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fabcnews.go.com%2FGMA%2Fstory%3Fid%3D2626032%26page%3D1

[Wimpy]

The real tragedy of war is that the cost are incalculable. It is a sweet notion that a volunteer system can lead to efficiency in social costs, but it is a mirage. Who can know how many brilliant scientists, doctors, economists or humanists have been murdered in war, not to mention all those who might have been nothing more than wonderful mothers and fathers. To think one can rank the efficiency of such a system is folly.

Bruce Webb is glad that Keynes was not killed on Flanders field, but how many Keynes-like minds did die in that most wasteful of all wars? How many Martin Luther Kings were killed in Southeast Asia? How many future Iraqi leaders in arts and sciences have been cut down the last three years? Who would know? Who could ever know?

Life is our most precious commodity, but the powerful and wealthy have always been eager to trade a "cheap" life for some other thing they value. Such behavior is grotesque.

To quote one old soldier from the First World War:

"I have often wondered if all the leading statesmen and generals of the warring countries had been threatened to be put under that barrage during that day in July 1916 (the Somme), and were then told that if they survived they would be forced to be under a similar one in a week's time, whether they would all have met together and signed a peace treaty before the week was up."

I think we all know the correct answer, but as long as the rich and powerful can send others to fight their fights even as they count their profit and admire their return on investment we will continue the slaughter.

[maria]

>

Most Americans in a semi-nconcious way sense that this "war" is a fake war, or at least a stupid war, that is being pushed by warmongers for purposes of their own. And find it difficult to take it as seriously as the warmongers want them to. Is America really as threatened as the administration claims? Would not our getting our military out of the Middle East and back home where they belong solve most of the problems? And what role does Israel play in this "war"? Have we, in fact, been duped into fighting its war for it?

[maria]

Somehow the first part of the general's statement didn't post. Ergo:

"Americans need to get serious about the war against international terrorism and start encouraging more young men and women to join the military, a top Army general said Friday."

And the word should be "unconscious" not "nconscious".

[duus]

His quote was about GW Bush, by the way. He said "The president used to live in the state of texas, and now he's in the state of denial. That's what happens if you don't get educated, you get stuck in Iraq." The washington post article is built a deliberate misinterpretation of his remarks.

You guys are patsys.

[anne]

"We can't have a part of America say, 'Yes, but not my son or daughter.'"

Well, I say, "No, and not my son or daughter." Not your son or daughter either, no sons or daughters should have been sent to war in Iraq and none should be there now.

[duus]

It is also disingenuous, I think, to say that economists don't view "efficient" as "good." Save the occasional footnote or handwavyness about social welfare functions, economists almost always conflate the two.

[anne]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/print/200601019_after_pats_birthday/

October 19, 2006

After Pat's Birthday
By Kevin Tillman

It is Pat's birthday on November 6, and elections are the day after. It gets me thinking about a conversation I had with Pat before we joined the military. He spoke about the risks with signing the papers. How once we committed, we were at the mercy of the American leadership and the American people. How we could be thrown in a direction not of our volition. How fighting as a soldier would leave us without a voice… until we got out.

Much has happened since we handed over our voice:

Somehow we were sent to invade a nation because it was a direct threat to the American people, or to the world, or harbored terrorists, or was involved in the September 11 attacks, or received weapons-grade uranium from Niger, or had mobile weapons labs, or WMD, or had a need to be liberated, or we needed to establish a democracy, or stop an insurgency, or stop a civil war we created that can't be called a civil war even though it is. Something like that.

Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and condemns everything that it is.

Somehow our elected leaders were subverting international law and humanity by setting up secret prisons around the world, secretly kidnapping people, secretly holding them indefinitely, secretly not charging them with anything, secretly torturing them. Somehow that overt policy of torture became the fault of a few "bad apples" in the military.

Somehow back at home, support for the soldiers meant having a five-year-old kindergartener scribble a picture with crayons and send it overseas, or slapping stickers on cars, or lobbying Congress for an extra pad in a helmet. It's interesting that a soldier on his third or fourth tour should care about a drawing from a five-year-old; or a faded sticker on a car as his friends die around him; or an extra pad in a helmet, as if it will protect him when an IED throws his vehicle 50 feet into the air....

[anne]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/print/200601019_after_pats_birthday/

Kevin Tillman

Somehow the more soldiers that die, the more legitimate the illegal invasion becomes.

Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on the ground.

Somehow those afraid to fight an illegal invasion decades ago are allowed to send soldiers to die for an illegal invasion they started.

Somehow faking character, virtue and strength is tolerated.

Somehow profiting from tragedy and horror is tolerated.

Somehow the death of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people is tolerated.

Somehow subversion of the Bill of Rights and The Constitution is tolerated.

Somehow suspension of Habeas Corpus is supposed to keep this country safe....

[maria]

And now the warmongers are turning on each other. Chalabi says Wolfowitz is the reason all has gone wrong.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/
article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003350110

[evagrius]

Ibn Khaldun was a Moslem historian of the 14th century.
He was probably the first social scientist and formulated a theory as to why empires rise and collapse.
One of his tenets was that "group solidarity" is a key to a society's success or failure. Group solidarity essentially means that everyone shares the burden of maintaining a society. It means that everyone shares the burden of fighting a war, for example, including the ruling class, and everyone shares the losses.
When a society loses its group solidarity, only a certain group goes to war,( not the ruling class, of course). It is at that moment when a society begins to decline.
The U.S. became an "empire" after WWII. Everyone fought in WWII, all classes, all types. It created a deep group solidarity, one that allowed the U.S. to become very prosperous and powerful. You can see the power of that solidarity by looking who was elected after WWII;
Eisenhower, ( a leader during that war), Kennedy, ( a war hero), Nixon, ( a goldbricker in the Navy during that war- but he was in it), etc;all the way to Bush I.
It's only when you get to Clinton, ( who got a draft deferment based on scholarship) and Bush II, ( who avoided the draft not by scolarship but by coonections), that you see leaders who did not participate in defending the country.
Now we see the ruling class, making sure its children avoid war, sending the ruled to fight and die. It's a clear sign of collapse, morally, ethically, and socially.

[Bruce Webb]

"Yet in terms of education levels, 82.9 percent of the Army's enlisted force — those at the rank of sergeant or below — has a high school degree or equivalent. That's above the average of 78.8 percent for the population as a whole, according to 2005 U.S. census data. ....

As for officers, almost all — 98 percent — are college graduates, and four out of 10 have a master's degree or doctorate"

In most cases the military requires a high school degree or equivalent to enlist and a college degree to get a commission. Pointing out that a little more than 4 out of 5 enlisted meet the minimum qualifications for the job as a defense of the overall quality is a little strained. And the reason that 4 out of 10 officers have a graduate degree is that the military has a policy of sending its officers to graduate school. If you separated out those officers who had a graduate degree before joining the military from those who earned it on military time I suspect you would have a pretty tiny fraction.

What this statistic tells me is that 17.1% of all enlisted don't even meet minimum qualifications and even while serving haven't been able to earn a GED. Really this boils down to saying that the average military guy is better educated than the average immigrant field worker or crack head burglar. Or in less inflammatory terms that people with day jobs generally are more likely to have more education than people without. Yes because minimum qualifications, testing, and other types of screening are designed to act as a sieve. That the army has adjusted the mesh so as to let almost 20% get through the screen anyway is not exactly something to point to with pride.

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/04/world/middleeast/04sniper.html?hp&ex=1162702800&en=a19ab167e70c1aeb&ei=5094&partner=homepage

November 4, 2006

Sniper Attacks Adding to Peril of U.S. Troops
By C. J. CHIVERS

KARMA, Iraq — The bullet passed through Lance Cpl. Juan Valdez-Castillo as his Marine patrol moved down a muddy urban lane. It was a single shot. The lance corporal fell against a wall, tried to stand and fell again.

His squad leader, Sgt. Jesse E. Leach, faced where the shot had come from, raised his rifle and grenade launcher and quickly stepped between the sniper and the bloodied marine. He walked backward, scanning, ready to fire.

Shielding the marine with his own thick body, he grabbed the corporal by a strap and dragged him across a muddy road to a line of tall reeds, where they were concealed. He put down his weapon, shouted orders and cut open the lance corporal's uniform, exposing a bubbling wound.

Lance Corporal Valdez-Castillo, shot through the right arm and torso, was saved. But the patrol was temporarily stuck. The marines were engaged in the task of calling for a casualty evacuation while staring down their barrels at dozens of windows that faced them, as if waiting for a ghost's next move.

This sequence on Tuesday here in Anbar Province captured in a matter of seconds an expanding threat in the war in Iraq....

[Peter Schaeffer]

All,

It is perhaps worth noting that two of the potential Republican candidates for the presidency in 2008, both served in Vietnam and have sons in the military. I am referring to Duncan Hunter and John McCain.

Duncan Hunter's son fought in Fallujah. Indeed, Hunter held up intelligence legislation because he felt that it would impair the ability of his son's unit to fight. Clearly someone who cares about the troops on the ground.

John McCain's war record is well known. He also has a son in the military, who may be deployed to Iraq.

For the record I support Duncan Hunter and oppose John McCain. However, neither can be accused of being armchair warriors.

[anne]

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2006/11/why_oh_why_cant_1.html#comment-24888184

November 4, 2006

Why Oh Why Can't We Have a Better Press Corps?
Edite by Brad DeLong

CJR owes Sy Hersh a big apology:

Not So Fast, CJR : [O]ver the next decade, many, many people will be kissing Seymour Hersh's ring and pleading forgiveness.

A reread of a Columbia Journalism Review piece on Mr. Hersh yielded this passage -- a perfect example of the man's skepticism proving prescient:

On April 7, for example, when the U.S. military was temporarily bogged down in southern Iraq, Hersh rushed into print with an article that accused Donald Rumsfeld of micro-managing (and mismanaging) the war plan. When Iraqi resistance crumbled, Hersh's article was obsolete.

This is from the July/August 2003 issue. Kiss it, CJR!

[coitdeck]

Let me point out that the basis for this discussion is wrong: Kerry bungled a joke about President Bush, his personal failures and ending up in Iraq. Most jokes are based on stereotypes and if anything, Kerry was politically incorrect to imply an unspoken truth about volunteer armies. The Republicans and the press managed to re-frame the debate to feed the stereotype about Kerry as not supporting the troops and that he is an elitist. So who is being more honest? Kerry, the Republicans or the press for allowing the Kerry's statement to be twisted into something it is not?

[anne]

So that we understand meanness, Republican Duncan Hunter is Chairman of the House Armed Services, though not for long, and has been a prime fear and war monger along with standing for everything John Murtha stands against. Beyond that, soon to be President.

[Peter Schaeffer]

All,

Another piece of humor (black) in all of this is that Bush appears to be smarter than Kerry. Don't believe it? Check out http://isteve.blogspot.com/2006/11/kerry-bush-flap.html

"Apparently, the prepared text that Kerry was supposed to read said:

"Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you are intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush."

Okay, well, not bad, although a little strange coming from a guy who voted to let Bush get us stuck in Iraq. And who had a slightly lower GPA than Bush during their overlapping careers at Yale. And who did a little worse than Bush on their military officer qualification tests."

Steve Sailer has a wealth of data about the qualifications of US military personnel. They are well above average compared to the rest of the US.

[Bruce Webb]

"For the record I support Duncan Hunter and oppose John McCain. However, neither can be accused of being armchair warriors."

Duncan Hunter personally inserted a provision sunsetting the auditor responsible for rooting out fraud in Iraqi contracts, including those directly supporting the troops.

http://www.washtimes.com/upi/20061103-103059-8559r.htm

Note this is from a historically rightwing paper

"Democratic and Republican senators are working on legislation to reverse a provision killing the U.S. agency overseeing reconstruction money spent in Iraq.
According to The New York Times, the provision closing the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction as of Oct. 1, 2007, was tacked on at the last minute to a complex military authorization bill by staffers of Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, chairwoman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, said it's a "mystery" how the provision became part of the final conference committee version. "

Heck of a job Dunkie. "Clearly someone who cares about the troops on the ground." Well if you define 'troops' as 'Kellog Brown Root' then maybe so.

[Peter Schaeffer]

Bruce Webb,

Duncan Hunter's son name is Duncan Duane Hunber, not Kellog Brown Root. He served as a Marine First Lieutenant in Fallujah. You can impune Duncan Hunter's ties to defense contractors to your heart's content. However, he and his family have served honorably and are still doing so.

[spencer]

Continuing to fight a war so that the earlier casulties will not have died in vain is a prime example of the sunk cost fallacy.

[dryfly]

Continuing to fight a war so that the earlier casulties will not have died in vain is a prime example of the sunk cost fallacy.

And one of the most popular memes in all of politics.

[Bruce Webb]

Peter S.: Duncan Hunter belongs in a jail cell. You were the one who exploited his son's service not me. You shamingly used the son to defend the honor of the father. And cherry picked a single vote to boot.

Deal with it.

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/04/opinion/04sat1.html

November 4, 2006

Blinding the Taxpayers on Iraq

Talk about arbitrary deadlines. Iraq is still an open-ended tragedy, and there is mounting evidence that without vigilant, independent monitoring, reconstruction contracts will waste American tax dollars without delivering the results that Iraqis have been promised. Still, the Republican-controlled Congress has voted to close down, as of next Oct. 1, the one effective oversight agency that has shown it could produce results.

The deadline for ending the work of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction was included in the conference report on a huge military authorization bill — inserted at the last minute in the back room by the staff of Duncan Hunter, the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. It should be promptly lifted by the new Congress to be elected next week.

That ought to be possible even if the Republicans stay in charge, since neither the House nor the Senate included such a deadline in its original legislation. But if the Republicans do lose their House majority, Mr. Hunter will no longer be able carry out such mischief....

[calmo]

I personally feel like someone is hunting me with remarks like this:Truth be told, however, economics professors routinely instruct their students on the virtue of the all-volunteer army in language that comes dangerously close to Kerry's uncouth remark.I know he means me, and only me, with Truth be told, you? Who else cares about the telling of that? This is no general bullet people, but an intensely personal one.
So you can imagine my shock and dismay when economic professors are mentioned in the next breath. And 'virtue'? The man is armed, I tell you. (Can you be told?) [Even the Truth?...How about special Truths, secrets?)
Dare I continue the rest of the article without getting dressed? Should I read the comments (sometimes so much better than the article) before the obligatory dress rehearsal?
Ok, Uwe (how do you pronounce that? Mine (so far and I could change) "Yooooweeee" as in 'You wee, baby') is my pal. [Ok, people sometimes in the Truth hunt, there are distractions, over-riding distractions, worthy over-riding distractions. Now, admit it: wouldn't you like to share a beer or 2 with this guy?]

I'm not going to start here: Let me [Mark] start with this [Uwe's] statement:

On this rationale, economists certify the all-volunteer army as efficient and thus good.

Economists do not define efficient as good or bad. Given a particular measure of equity, an efficient outcome might be quite "bad." But that is not the main point I want to make. like I'm supposed to and entertain this distinction/connection between 'efficient' and 'good' and whether or not economists do (or don't define them as such or whether it's not their place to define some of them) [or whether 'thus' is just plain frumpy].
No, it's time for those commentors who always inform me about what the fuss is all about. ['Why did Kerry apologize?' is that it?] I do need their guidance, you? (Shepherds need to know, are you guidable, people?) [You are no fun if you cannot be misled down the path or be misled down any path...I think that's it, you?]
Ok, those commentor's paths...

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/01/washington/01chaplain.html?ex=1317355200&en=44c409451a42f022&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

October 1, 2006

Chaplain Prayer Provision Stricken From Military Bill
By NEELA BANERJEE

WASHINGTON — Congress removed a controversial provision in a military bill on Friday that would have permitted chaplains to offer sectarian prayer at mandatory nondenominational events. At the same time, lawmakers moved to rescind guidelines issued last year by the Air Force and Navy meant to curtail the risk of religious coercion and proselytizing within the ranks.

"The provisions in today's bill represent a full step forward and a half step back," said Representative Steve Israel, Democrat of New York and a member of the House Armed Services Committee. "We removed dangerous language undermining religious freedom and military effectiveness, but I am distressed that instead of moving forward with unequivocal religious tolerance in the military, we are reopening old loopholes that permitted some acts of coercion and proselytizing." ...

The provision's backers — among them Representative Duncan Hunter, Republican of California and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee — contended that Christian chaplains had long invoked Christ in nondenominational settings....

[And, on civil liberty....]

[anne]

"Truth be told, however, economics professors routinely instruct their students on the virtue of the all-volunteer army in language that comes dangerously close to Kerry's uncouth remark."

This is an unknowable assertion, and an assertion that matches nothing I have ever heard or think I would hear.

Thank you, Calmo.

[calmo]

Lots of heat (nearly always good)[neva 'thus good'] here people. Some smoke ('thank you calmo' in my eyes as I type people)[but real fire with Pete and Bruce --surely thanks to both these beating hearts, yes?...But can I get mine going in the face of coitdeck's prevailing cool head?]
Not really. Does Kerry's remark however bungled (seriously, people how bungled, exactly, was it? Do recall the 'Fooled you once' joke, should you need guidance...) bring more...or less attention to that War on/in/for/at Iraq?
Ok, now for Mark's complaint...ok, ok, guidance.

[maria]

The Guardian cartoonist, Steve Bell, got Kerry's joke precisely. I won't link to the cartoon; you can find it on the Guardian site. It has George emerging from the rear end of a camel, with the caption: Stuck in Iraq.

[new]

No-one liked me when I had a GI haircut post Viet Nam. We lost. Let's see in a year how vets are respeted

[calmo]

Nice little bullet new, and thank you for joining us. I like you right away...and most vets I do respect and could learn to like probably...regardless of their GI haircut. I'm listening.

[anne]

'Small wonder, then, that even college students who ardently supported the invasion of Iraq and just as ardently favor "staying the course" in Iraq argue smugly that, instead of serving their country in uniform, they can serve it so much better in law school or by trading bonds for Goldman Sachs....'

Never ever have I heard such an argument, nor has any friend I have mailed to ask, though Uwe E. Reinhardt claims to have heard the argument many times at Princeton. Frankly, I do not believe the assertion. Sorry, I do not believe the assertion! I find a deserved respect for those who are serving from those who support the occupation and those who do not.

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/15/opinion/15herbert.html?ex=1281758400&en=4aa46475578896ac&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

August 15, 2005

Lives Blown Apart
By BOB HERBERT

Sema Olson was in the living room watching television when the phone rang. It was the Department of the Army calling. A voice asked if she'd heard from her son in the past 24 hours.

Ms. Olson tried to ward off the panic. "Is he still alive?" she asked.

After verifying her identity, the man on the phone assured her that her son, Bobby Rosendahl, who was stationed in Iraq, was still alive. But he'd been badly wounded.

With that Saturday night phone call, life as Ms. Olson had known it came to an end. Her family's long, long period of overwhelming sacrifice was under way.

Bobby Rosendahl, a 24-year-old Army corporal (and avid golfer) from Tacoma, Wash., was literally blown into the air last March 12 when an improvised explosive device detonated beneath his Stryker armored vehicle. He remembers landing on his back, with fuel spilling all around him and insurgents firing at him from the roof of a mosque.

Ms. Olson, during an interview in Washington, D.C., where Corporal Rosendahl is being treated at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, quietly cataloged her son's wounds:

"Both of his heels and ankles were crushed. He had a compound fracture of his femur in two places. Three-quarters of his kneecap was missing. His thigh was blown away. He had many, many open wounds, which all have closed except four right now."

She paused, sighed, then went on: "His left leg was amputated three weeks after he arrived here. He's not willing to give up his right leg. He's hoping to save it. All he wants to do is golf again. But we don't know. He's had 36 surgeries so far."

When you talk to close relatives of men and women who have been wounded in the war, it's impossible not to notice the strain that is always evident in their faces. Their immediate concern is with the wounded soldier or marine. But just behind that immediate concern, in most cases, is the frightening awareness that they have to try and rebuild a way of life that was also blown apart when their loved one was wounded.

Ms. Olson, who is 45 and divorced, gave up everything - her work, her rented townhouse, her car - and moved from Tacoma to a hotel on the grounds of Walter Reed to be with her son and assist in his recovery....

[anne]

There is understanding, and there is astonishment that this could ever be so:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/washington/11veterans.html?ex=1318219200&en=57988c04bbbbd7d4&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

October 11, 2006

Data Suggests Vast Costs Loom in Disability Claims
By SCOTT SHANE

Nearly one in five soldiers leaving the military after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan has been at least partly disabled as a result of service, according to documents of the Department of Veterans Affairs obtained by a Washington research group.

The number of veterans granted disability compensation, more than 100,000 to date, suggests that taxpayers have only begun to pay the long-term financial cost of the two conflicts. About 567,000 of the 1.5 million American troops who have served so far have been discharged.

"The trend is ominous," said Paul Sullivan, director of programs for Veterans for America, an advocacy group, and a former V.A. analyst.

Mr. Sullivan said that if the current proportions held up over time, 400,000 returning service members could eventually apply for disability benefits when they retired....

[maria]

And David Frum certainly has learned nothing, sadly enough. Some people will never learn, probably because they have reasons, conscious or unconscious, not to.

"My most fundamental views on the war in Iraq remain as they were in 2003: The war was right, victory is essential, and defeat would be calamitous."

Defeat is what is coming, David, in case you want to open your eyes.

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/nyregion/03soldier.html?ex=1304308800&en=52ca90fc0782f48b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

May 3, 2006

A Sergeant's Death in Iraq Follows His Fiancée's
By MICHELLE O'DONNELL

Jose Gomez knew the loss of war. In 2003, his fiancée, Analaura Esparza-Gutierrez, an Army private, died in a roadside bombing in Tikrit, Iraq. So when he was ordered to Iraq for a second tour last July, this time as a reserve officer, he decided to spare his mother by not telling her.

Instead, Sergeant Gomez, 23, invented a detailed ruse that he was studying accounting and economics two days a week at a college in Texas and working. He made regular Saturday phone calls to his mother, Maria Gomez, of Corona, Queens, and insisted on being the one to place the call. When Mrs. Gomez dialed the number and found it disconnected, he gently brushed her off, reminding her that he would call her.

Then a bank statement arrived at Mrs. Gomez's home, showing Army paychecks deposited to Sergeant Gomez's account.

"You've been in the Army these eight months," Mrs. Gomez told her son.

"No, no, I'm not," Sergeant Gomez insisted.

There was no call last Saturday. On Friday, two officers and an English-Spanish translator came to tell her that her son was killed that day in a roadside bombing in Baghdad.

"He never wanted me to be hurt," Mrs. Gomez, a petite woman in jeans and a turquoise sweater, recalled yesterday, sitting on a settee in her small living room on 104th Street, made smaller by the presence of a pack of reporters pressing her for details of her son.

Her eyes moistened when she spoke of him, but when she spoke of his deception, she glowed with tenderness and said that her son would go to any lengths for her....

[maria]

Anne:

I find the argument that "I hate the war, but I support the troops" troubling. During WWII would one have said that Germans should have supported their troops? One can feel sorry for the troops who have been made into tools for a war machine and sympathize with their predicament. But how can one "support" them when every day they are doing the work of the war machine?

[anne]

Yes; there is a growing understanding of what Iraq has meant and means even if understanding seems be now trivial.

[Richard]

At protest marches, the one chant that inevitably is made is "Support our troops -- bring them home".

It is possible -- and for the sake of sanity, must be possible -- to support individuals even while decrying the policy.

[anne]

"Even for the sake of sanity, must be possible...."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/02/world/middleeast/02medic.html?ex=1320123600&en=672f013573f7887e&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

November 2, 2006

Tending a Fallen Marine, With Skill, Prayer and Fury
By C. J. CHIVERS

KARMA, Iraq — Petty Officer Third Class Dustin E. Kirby clutched the injured marine's empty helmet. His hands were coated in blood. Sweat ran down his face, which he was trying to keep straight but kept twisting into a snarl.

He held up the helmet and flipped it, exposing the inside. It was lined with blood and splinters of bone.

"The round hit him," he said, pausing to point at a tiny hole that aligned roughly with a man's temple. "Right here."

Petty Officer Kirby, 22, is a Navy corpsman, the trauma medic assigned to Second Mobile Assault Platoon of Weapons Company, Second Battalion, Eighth Marines. Everyone calls him Doc. He had just finished treating a marine who had been shot by an Iraqi sniper.

"It was 7.62 millimeter," he continued. "Armor piercing."

He reached into his pocket and retrieved the bullet, which he had found. "The impact with the Kevlar stopped most of it," he said. "But it tore through, hit his head, went through and came out."

He put the bullet in his breast pocket, to give to an intelligence team later. Sweat kept rolling off his face, mixed with tears. His voice was almost cracking, but he managed to control it and keep it deep. "When I got there, there wasn't much I could do," he said.

Then he nodded. He seemed to be talking to himself. "I kept him breathing," he said.

He looked at Lance Cpl. Matias Tafoya, his driver, and raised his voice. It was almost a shout. "When I told you that I do not let people die on me, I meant it," he said. "I meant it."

He scanned the Iraqi houses, perhaps 150 yards away, on the other side of a fetid green canal. Marines were all around, pressed to the ground, peering from behind machine-gun turrets or bracing against their armored vehicles, aiming rifles at where they thought the sniper was.

The sniper had made a single shot just as the marines were leaving a rural settlement on the western edge of Karma, a city near Falluja in Anbar Province.

The marines had been searching several houses on this side of the canal, where they found five Kalashnikov assault rifles and bomb components, and were getting back into their vehicles when everyone heard the shot. It was a single loud crack.

No one was precisely sure where it had come from. Everyone knew precisely where it hit. It struck a marine who was peering out of the first vehicle's gun turret....

[calmo]

Sub-optimally speaking, Mark may have a point. [Did you hear the crowd just rushing for the exits or was that me squeaking in my seat?] (The perils of posting bare foot..maybe more. Ok, so what's the big deal about being fully dressed before noon?) [Ok, 1:30 already...bloody bleeding daylight saving what exactly?] (As I regained socks and consciousness...not necessarily decorum...you dress code fanatics...)
I do think non-patsy duus (I'm sounding it like "Zeus" and not "zoos" izat ok?) is onto some conflationary things. [I'm dying to go down that path..fully dressed of course, guns blazing...]
And thankyou maria for spotting (this is a huge gift in the right hands...not like going hunting with Big Shot Dick.) The Guardian on this. [So much depends on overseas insights people...whyizat?]
And I almost forgot 'me' and not-so 'wimpy' --they always load a full magazine...not like some...parallel citizens I'm getting to like.
Only 3, slink?

[ken melvin]

Never was fair (6yrs USN 1959-65). When there was a draft, rich went to college or joined the National Guard or reserves, which in those days meant that you never left the states. Then, you could not get a job until your obligations were met, and if you couldn’t afford college ….

The real cost of war must include the damage done to the families of the soldiers and the damage to those who survive. In VN, they were dumped into a combat area by helicopter on the day they arrived. If they survived and escaped wounding, they were helicoptered out of a combat zone, flown home and released without any deprogramming, thus it was that so many had/have problems. The killing of another human is, all agree, an unnatural act. Those who do so are never the same. I know WWII vets who still wake up at night screaming. I know Vietnam vets who wake up at night screaming. My grandfather was a Spanish America War vet who woke up at night screaming.

[(:>(]

I am a republican that would dearly like to vote Democratic. So far the Democrats have been wishy-washy on the war in Iraq. Why can’t they just come out and say that the Iraq war is a fiasco and a big mistake. Kerry was wishy-washy during the last election, so I voted for Nader. Kerry is still wishy-washy.

I think the Christian right should get their own party. They have co-opted the Republican party. This county is being ruined by religious extremists. I am pissed. Really pissed.

[anne]

No; the Democrats have been ever so clear on Iraq. From the conscience of John Murtha on, there have been cries to leave Iraq and cries in turn that cowards cut an run, but the cries of cutting and running are never from Democrats. And, if there are Democrats who cry leave louder than others as Murtha or Byrd or Kennedy, then cling to those who cry so loudest and bring the others along in leaving. There is the task for you.

[anne]

next to of course god america i
by ee cummings

"next to of course god america i
love you land of the pilgrims' and so forth oh
say can you see by the dawn's early my
country tis of centuries come and go
and are no more what of it we should worry
in every language even deafanddumb
thy sons acclaim your glorious name by gorry
by jingo by gee by gosh by gum
why talk of beauty what could be more beaut-
iful than these heroic happy dead
who rushed like lions to the roaring slaughter
they did not stop to think they died instead
then shall the voice of liberty be mute?"

He spoke. And drank rapidly a glass of water

[as reminded by dear andres]

[ken melvin]

Where is it writ that democrats must speak with one voice? Republicans?

[evagrius]

"Mr. Sullivan said that if the current proportions held up over time, 400,000 returning service members could eventually apply for disability benefits when they retired...."

I have a friend in the county where I worked who is the V.A. rep. He processes the disability claims for veterans. The process for getting disability is rather Byzantine and sometimes difficult to obtain. However, the V.A. hospital system and health care system has vastly improved, a legacy of Clinton. I wonder how it will cope when the new vets begin using it given the Bush administration's record.

[donna]

Yes, we value those on the ground so well they got a 2% pay raise.

The generals safely at home, of course, got 8%.

And Halliburton got billions.

How anyone can still even claim to be Republican and support the troops in this country and look at themselves in the mirror, I really don't know anymore.

[anne]

For ee cummings this was a World war I memory, but the memory is suitable still.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=EE05E7DF1730E762BC4850DFB266838B629EDE

April 30, 1930

All Quiet On the Western Front
By MORDAUNT HALL

From the pages of Erich Maria Remarque's widely read book of young Germany in the World War, All Quiet on the Western Front, Carl Laemmle's Universal Pictures Corporation has produced a trenchant and imaginative audible picture, in which the producers adhere with remarkable fidelity to the spirit and events of the original stirring novel. It was presented last night at the Central Theatre before an audience that most of the time was held to silence by its realistic scenes. It is a notable achievement, sincere and earnest, with glimpses that are vivid and graphic. Like the original, it does not mince matters concerning the horrors of battle. It is a vocalized screen offering that is pulsating and harrowing, one in which the fighting flashes are photographed in an amazingly effective fashion.

Lewis Milestone, who has several good films to his credit, was entrusted with the direction of this production. And Mr. Laemmle had the foresight to employ those well-known playwrights, George Abbott and Maxwell Anderson, to make the adaptation and write the dialogue. Some of the scenes are not a little too long, and one might also say that a few members of the cast are not Teutonic in appearance; but this means but little when one considers the picture as a whole, for wherever possible, Mr. Milestone has used his fecund imagination, still clinging loyally to the incidents of the book. In fact, one is just as gripped by witnessing the picture as one was by reading the printed pages, and in most instances it seems as though the very impressions written in ink by Herr Remarque had become animated on the screen.

In nearly all the sequences, fulsomeness is avoided. Truth comes to the fore, when the young soldiers are elated at the idea of joining up, when they are disillusioned, when they are hungry, when they are killing rats in a dugout, when they are shaken with fear, and when they, or one of them, becomes fed up with the conception of war held by the elderly man back home.

Often the scenes are of such excellence that if they were not audible one might believe that they were actual motion pictures of activities behind the lines, in the trenches, and in No Man's Land. It is an expansive production with views that never appear to be cramped. In looking at a dugout one readily imagines a long line of such earthy abodes. When shells demolish these underground quarters, the shrieks of fear, coupled with the rat-tat-tat of machine guns, the bang-ziz of the trench mortars, and the whining of shells, it tells the story of the terrors of fighting better than anything so far has done in animated photography coupled with the microphone.

There are heartrending glimpses in a hospital, where one youngster has had his leg amputated and still believes that he has a pain in his toes. Just as he complains of this, he remembers another soldier who had complained of the same pain in the identical words. He then realizes what has happened to him, and he shrieks and cries out that he does not want to go through life a cripple. There is the death room from which nobody is said to come out, and Paul, admirably acted by Lewis Ayres, is taken to this chamber shouting, as he is wheeled away, that he will come back. And he does. The agony in this hospital reflects that of the details given by Herr Remarque....

[run75441]

Uwe E. Reinhardt Remarks

Almost immediately after Kerry fumbled through his alleged joke, attempting to be another Colbert, and in the end comeing dangerously close to the real truth; I post this over at Slate:

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq. ..."

John, others here, and I lived in an era where if you were not in college; you were drafted into the military. VietNam was our albatross. 88% of the Army were draftees and 50% of the casualties were draftees. African Americans suffered in disproportion numbers the curse of VietNam and suffer today for the same reasons. While there is no draft, there are also few jobs for the uneducated and the under educated. The cost of college exceeds the livelihood of many of those in the lower taxpayer brackets.

The economy sucks and it forces many people to accept jobs which do not pay anywhere near what it takes to go to college. It sucks for all of those people without High School educations, for all of those without a college degree, and for all of those who are a minority. They can not find jobs which will pay them enough to live on or save, much less attend a junior or a 4 year college. The jobs beyond hamburger flippers, and also the higher paying jobs, are not there to support them. Read the BLS reports, Participation Rate has not returned to what it was immediately after the 2001 Recession typicallly the lowest point of employment after any recession. The people who suffer the highest Unemployment Rate today are the uneducated, under educated, and minorities (again BLS). Bush has the worst job creation tenure since Hoover.

As a result, those at the lower end of the economic strata, which includes most of those I have mentioned, can not afford to go to college and have few choices outside of college. The most stable occupation they can find is to go into the military as they can not find jobs to support themselves, beyond sustaining just themselves, nor can they afford to go to college (repeat). At least in the military, they can save for college and the military will supplement their education once discharged. A very clear alternative and one of a few to those who have no economic choices. So is Mr. Kerry correct in what he says? I am inclined to agree with his words because the economic alternatives for those without a college education are extremely limited. Bush has a ready made Army in the unemployed and the under employed.

Some other quotes of interest:

"I don't think they ought to be balancing their budget on the backs of the poor."

"The Republicans in Congress . . . have a lot to learn from Governor Bush, who has actually had to administer social programs and may have come to the radical conclusion that it takes money to run them adequately."

President Bush while campaigning for the Presidency in 1999.

Now those are insults to every person who is not a part of the 1% of the taxpayers who gained $thousands in tax breaks from the 2001/2003/2006 tax breaks.

[ilsm]

Uwe is dead wrong.

As is professor Steven E. Landsburg.

I was around and have discussed the matter of the all volunteer force with others who were in the service at the end of Vietnam.

Several reasons rise from guys who had to lead troops during the transition and before.

One, Vietnam lasted longer than needed because we used draftees rather than reserve and guard formations, as the casualties in small towns rose the politicians would have demanded an end to a slow but futile bloodbath. Maybe a support for the Rochester idea.

The pros in the pentagon saw the all volunteer force and its concurrent reliance on the total force (guard) as a forcing function to avoid quagmires like Iraq.

They/we were wrong.

But who would have predicted a facscist (Goebbels type) regime in God's country?

Actually, you want smart guys in combat. The more intelligent, if well trained, the soldier the better the outcome.

The draftee was a prime force for keeping the Masengales and lifers from screwing up royally.

The issue with the draft was that the better connected avoided it and the draft did not bring in the cross section of society it should have.

So, anyone talking about a draft must commit to: 'no deferments and no waivers'.

Then Cheney would have a DD214.

A very difficult thing to imagine.

What we evolve toward in an all volunteer force is a mercenary force filled with careerists who would violate the Hatch Act and be shown on drudgereport holding up a silly political sign.

They should be gathered in and court martialed for making a political statement in uniform in front useless but very expensive piece of US military equipment.

You end the draft you end up with lifers who are tools of Bush and Cheney who are draft dodgers.

A Charlie Foxtrot of a situstion.

[slink]

ilsm
who u planning to fight with this new model army ???

[ilsm]

Every Merikan who says stay the course should enlist and do this:

Go march off to war, do not ask the honored volunteer to do what you wish THEM to volunteer to do. Realize what they suffer.

If you ask them you should march the march with them, and return in what way the Norns would have it.

"Don't Cheer"

Don't cheer, damn you! Don't cheer!
Silence! Your bitterest tear
Is fulsomely sweet to-day. . . .
Down on your knees and pray.

See, they sing as they go,
Marching row upon row.
Who will be spared to return,
Sombre and starkly stern?
Chaps whom we knew - so strange,
Distant and dark with change;
Silent as those they slew,
Something in them dead too.
Who will return this way,
To sing as they sing to-day.

Send to the glut of the guns
Bravest and best of you sons.
Hurl a million to slaughter,
Blood flowing like Thames water;
Pile up pyramid high
Your dead to the anguished sky;
A monument down all time
Of hate and horror and crime.
Weep, rage, pity, curse, fear -
Anything, but . . . don't cheer.

Sow to the ploughing guns
Seed of your splendid sons.
Let your heroic slain
Richly manure the plain.
What will the harvest be?
Unborn of Unborn will see. . . .

Dark is the sky and drear. . . .
For the pity of God don't cheer.
Dark and dread is their way.
Who sing as they march to-day. . . .
Humble your hearts and pray.

--- Robert Service 1939

[slink]

no one took me up on my battle buddy plan

share the mortal hazard
of combat
from the conmfort of your very productive civilian job

citizen yogi
might have a few more thoughts b4 sending in ilsm
hi Q rangers
if they stood a lottery chance of dying
right along with
one of our brave warriors

[DRR]

I'm sure an all volunteer army has it's problems, but I can't see modern conscription as being defensible.

[calmo]

co-venturing slink
bridging that chasm
between the civvy
and the soldier,
between the ordered
and the persuaded,
between the blood
shed limbs lost lives
managled
And that other world:
this tidy one
only cluttered with
anne's postings
of reported
cries of mothers,
a few unhinged vets,
and many armchair
general boys.

yes old socrates
did not sit in
the bleachers
with the boys
making wagers
making plans

But wars were
genuine then
and not means
for subverting
your citizens

[calmo]

I had hopes that Uwe was less credentialled than...well than this:The writer is James Madison professor of political economy at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.So I take that offer to go for a drink with him, back.
Yes I'm a snob and carry huge prejudices. Such as tolerating piles of poorly understood issues due to scant resources. Such as tolerating poorly expressed ideas due to a lack of careful reading of material that should have served as an example. Such as tolerating a certain youthful inexperience that might account somewhat for that poor literary performance.
But this ass is a professor who has no excuse for his freshman-like opening: There is no question that Sen. John F. Kerry owed our men and women in the military and their families the apology he offered this week. Even in clumsy jest, if that is what his remarks were, they could not have come across as anything but insulting. And as a freshman I could cut him some slack about who gets to say what is questionable, who determines whether an apology is required, what is a clumsy jest and what is insulting. But the man is an old windbag (seriously, many people saw Fahrenheit, but it doesn't seem to have registered with Uwe) His closure annoys me:
None of this excuses what Kerry said. [not just identifying the violator, but exercising by fiat, the authority to do so] But it does point up the hypocrisy rampant among his critics,[does Uwe rise to the level of critic or just fatass?] who have waxed almost hysterical [we hear you Uwe] over his remark. I do not recall these same critics, including President Bush, [ so Uwe can bury w in the very last paragraph to achieve his 'fair and balanced' critique? ] lapsing [but not the professor? ] into similarly righteous hysteria when Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld only three years ago flippantly insulted [and how many readers has Uwe insulted with this piece Uwe? ] legions of World War II and Vietnam draftees by labeling such soldiers of "no value."
I don't think just a drink would sort him out, but I was hoping...
I think I should apologize to anne for pal-ing up to the wrong person.

[Peter Schaeffer]

Bruce Webb,
Evagrius wrote ” Now we see the ruling class, making sure its children avoid war, sending the ruled to fight and die. It's a clear sign of collapse, morally, ethically, and socially”. I agree with him. The fact that two potential Republican presidential nominees have children in the military is entirely relevant. It turns out that at least 10 Congressmen have children in the military and at least 5 have served in Iraq. The list includes

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave
Sen. Tim Johnson
Rep. Ed Schrock
Rep. Joe Wilson (son served in Iraq)
Rep. John Kline (son served in Iraq)
Rep. Duncan Hunter (son served in Iraq)
Rep. Todd Akin (son served in Iraq)
Sen. Kit Bond (son served in Iraq)
Sen. John McCain
Sen. Jim Bunning

See http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/03/washington/03family.html?ex=1312257600&en=a00d32af2a3ec790&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss for an article on the subject.

[calmo]

The impact of Michael Moore?

Did they get outside the Green Zone?
Was there a limb loss count?
What rank did they achieve and how many returned for a 2nd tour?
Will any of them likely use this as a stepping stone for their political aspirations?

[ilsm]

slink,

We had no Cromwell in the 70's.

Instead of civil war we saw the Red Army.

Now we have a new cavalry.

But no enemy

nor recuse for the dainties

[maria]

Peter S:

There are 535 Congresspeople, 435 in the House and 100 in the Senate. Of these five have kids who served in Iraq. That is 0.009345 of the total. Less than one percent. That is really a super expression of "patriotism" and sacrifice, isn't it?

[Peter Schaeffer]

All,

The roughly 1% of Congressmen whose kids have served in Iraq would appear to be about 4 times greater than the population as a whole. Several fought in Fallujah.

[evagrius]

Anne;

All Quiet On the Western Front
By MORDAUNT HALL

Just as an aside,what a great movie review! What writing!

We've gone downhill in the verbal skills, haven't we?

[adam]

mandatory service hasn't stopped israel from building one of the largest economies in the world.

[anne]

Evagrius, thank you for reminding me to look at the career of Mordaunt Hall for the writing is terrific, but there are few reviews by Hall in the archives. I wonder why? I may not be looking properly.

[anne]

Ah, I understand now. I am always learning more about the NYTimes archives and there are hundreds of reviews by Mordaunt Hall. Look from within the NYTimes search engine whether starting from Google or the NYTimes. Nice.

[anne]

The point about military service in Iraq and Afghanistan is that the service is more hazardous than I, at least, had properly understood until recently. Also, the service is difficult even for soldiers who are not harmed physically or mentally. A draft would almost certainly have led to a far more active and profound anti-war an occupation stance than we have experienced. The personal cost of service has been fearful indeed.

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/washington/11veterans.html?ex=1318219200&en=57988c04bbbbd7d4&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Nearly one in five soldiers leaving the military after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan has been at least partly disabled as a result of service, according to documents of the Department of Veterans Affairs obtained by a Washington research group....

[anne]

The idea was to have a costless war and occupation or to mask the costs, personal and material, and the tragic intense costs have been and are being masked.

[slink]

Peter Schaeffer
did you serve

[Peter Schaeffer]

Anne,

Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_conflict_in_Iraq_since_2003#_note-icasualties. Useful quote

"21,266 U.S. military as of 21 October 2006 at a rate of 15.85 wounded per day. 9,603 too badly injured to return to duty within 72 hours"

These statistics should provide some insight into the number of soldiers who have been seriously injured in Iraq.

[Jungster]

If we truly believe that wars should not be fought in Iraq, we must be willing to forego our SUVs and live a very modest dwelling. As the Syarana movie acurately points out, our wonton use of oil keeps China and the rest of the world from growing and developing. Although cheap oil gives us cheap products (we truck almost everything across this country in gas/diesel guzzling trucks), it also limits how much other countries are able to receive - limited production. Even if we develop cheap alternate sources of energy and limit use of oil, it'll mean that oil prices will drastically fall and more will be available to other countries...like China...at very cheap prices. This means that our fateful fall from being number 1 would be greatly accelerated and spell America's doom.

If you can handle the truth, then be against the war over OIL. If you can accept that we can't maintain our standard of living without controlling oil, then you have the right to speak out over the war in Iraq. However, if you want MEDCARE and Social Security to be there for you, America can't afford NOT to be #1. The sad truth is that either America's is #1 or America collapses - we don't live in flats, drive mini-coopers nor walk to the nearest shopping center - we drive.

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/washington/11veterans.html?ex=1318219200&en=57988c04bbbbd7d4&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

October 11, 2006

Data Suggests Vast Costs Loom in Disability Claims
By SCOTT SHANE

Nearly one in five soldiers leaving the military after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan has been at least partly disabled as a result of service, according to documents of the Department of Veterans Affairs obtained by a Washington research group.

The number of veterans granted disability compensation, more than 100,000 to date, suggests that taxpayers have only begun to pay the long-term financial cost of the two conflicts. About 567,000 of the 1.5 million American troops who have served so far have been discharged.

"The trend is ominous," said Paul Sullivan, director of programs for Veterans for America, an advocacy group, and a former V.A. analyst.

Mr. Sullivan said that if the current proportions held up over time, 400,000 returning service members could eventually apply for disability benefits when they retired....