Re: Moon landing

Howdy wrote:

David Erbas-White wrote:

Yes, he did. He impugned their integrity by inferring that they are doing it for mercenary reasons -- that they've joined the military just because they want someone to pay their way through college.


Respectfully:
Needless to say, that is a major reason that many people join the military. I believe that a sense of patriotism, and a desire to serve the country also contributes, but I think that if you step back a bit you'll see that Bob is right about this. Not to the _exclusion_ of the desire to serve the country, but in addition to it. The military is of course well aware of this - if you look at recruiting materials, you'll see a mix of reference to service and reference to benefits (for example, check out GoArmy.com). There's a reason for that.


And with the same respect, what I see (and I see it in-depth these days, as my son is just about to graduate from high school, so I hear both from him and many of his contemporaries) from those who wish to go into the military is that the desire to serve comes first, and the thought process of 'working out the pay' comes second. Honestly, most of these kids don't really pay a huge amount of attention to the pay and perks (though frankly they should <G>). I'll give you three distinct examples that I know of (one is my son, but I won't name names... <G>). The first kid I know is growing up in a broken home, is not doing well in school, and doesn't know what to do with his life. In Civil Air Patrol, he has found that he can blossom, and that the 'military style' of life fits with him. He is contemplating joining the military after graduation, and (IMHO) the military is just what he needs to get straightened out. The second kid is doing well in school, but is also unsure of his future direction, but has seen enough of the military to be seriously considering it as a CAREER (not as a means to getting an education). Based on what I've seen, the military would be a great place for this kid too, and I believe he would do well, whether as an enlisted man or officer. The third kid is doing very well in school, and is trying to get into one of the military academies. He is unsure of whether he will make the military an actual career, but definitely wants to join (as an officer), give his service, and will later decide whether to stay. This kid is pretty dedicated, and does other extracurricular activities (other than school). He, too, will be an asset to the military, and will benefit from it.

The only one who (arguably) is going in for the education benefits is the third kid -- and frankly, IMHO, it's a 'side' issue -- he wants to go into a military academy as a challenge, and for the prestige, and to obtain officer status -- not because he doesn't have other means to obtain an education.

I don't disagree with your assertion that one shouldn't be proud of being paid for their job -- but the military is a special case. It even has special rules and laws that govern it, outside of those that govern the rest of the nation. IMHO, Bob's statement was a direct attack on the integrity of those who are volunteering -- he made two statements:

1. Most of todays military is there because they couldn't get money for their
education any other way.

I absolutely dispute this first assertion, and have put forth plenty of verbiage outlining my reasoning behind this.

2. No one screams when the poor die.

This is just a flat out nasty, wrong comment. Again, we know of plenty of folks who've been injured/killed in Iraq (and in other conflicts in the past), and there's not a single instance where the 'family background' has come into play when honoring them. I have met many military personnel who DO have money (in their family), but that's only been discovered after I have gotten to know them -- when I meet a soldier, I meet someone who has volunteered to support their country, and isn't wearing their background on their sleeve. One of the things that I've been told by some soldiers from poorer backgrounds is that the reason they LIKE the military is because (for the most part), everything is done on MERIT, not on background -- thus, they have the opportunity to MAKE THEIR OWN WAY, in some ways far better than they would be able to do in the 'civilian' world.

When I tell a soldier "thank you for serving", I don't generally have any knowledge of his/her background. They may be rich, they may be poor. I'm thanking them for the honor they have done (to me), by volunteering to serve, and possibly paying the ultimate price. To infer that 'just the poor' are volunteering is nasty on so many levels that I can't list them all, but in brief, it 1) denigrates the honor of the poor who've joined, inferring that they only did it for mercenary reasons, and taking away the dignity of their donation to our country, and 2) it denies and downplays the honor of the rich who've joined, IGNORING the fact that they've done so for patriotic reasons (since there obviously isn't a financial incentive for them to do so).

So, Mr. Howdy, while I understand YOUR position, it doesn't seem to be what Bob was saying, and I hope you consider this a respectful response to your reply...

David Erbas-White

I also disagree that suggesting that a person joined the military for the benefits amounts to "impugning their integrity". I took my job largely because they pay me, and it wouldn't upset me at all if someone pointed that out. I know a LOT of people who joined the military because it provided them with a way out of what would have otherwise been a sad little deadend life. I don't disrespect them for that decision: I respect them for it, even if it's the one and only reason they joined. It's a good decision - a VERY good decision - for a lot of people, simply on that basis, and a hell of a lot better than the popular alternatives.
================================
There are people, even here in America who believe that being in the U.S. military is simply wrong or worse. Some of them shoot their mouths off about it. If Bob had said something like that, then he'd deserve our bile. I barely know him, but I'd be very surprised to hear him say something genuinely anti-soldier. If we go after people who respect the troops the same way we go after those who do not, we're certainly not doing a service to the troops. Quite the opposite. 
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Questions for those still approving of Bush
    ... Do you understand that no tangible, truthful reason has ever been ... >>>Americans have no medical insurance and that the Bush administration ... *entitled* to what you pay for. ... >>>this mesh with the fact that the Bush administration has cut Veterans ...
    (misc.news.internet.discuss)
  • Re: My new article on copyright is now online!
    ... >Deaf people, for instance,, shouldn't need to pay. ... Give me a real reason why you don't ... pay some fraction of a penny to listen to the song. ...
    (rec.music.makers.songwriting)
  • Re: Course Pre Reading
    ... If he can't muster the resources to learn the ... material - for himself - at his age, ... The only reason to try to learn something completely on ... I want to add that I consider the tuition I pay a bargain ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: My apology to Ben Bernanke
    ... amount but because of the reason for them and ... any imaginable way to our financial system. ... Obama's Stimulus bill limited executive pay to $500K in any company ... AIG's best traders and sales people were reportedly being actively ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Leaders paying own capitation?
    ... be a Leader so as not to have to pay but then is a Leader in name only? ... a benefit by reason of their position. ... In my group the GEC has a very clear policy on AMS and expenses, ...
    (uk.rec.scouting)
Loading