I wonder if the Corps has changed a little bit over the years?
Looking for a few good senior women?
quote:
Marines Try to Recruit 78-Year-Old Woman Associated Press | March 25, 2006 SAUGUS, Calif. - Sonia Goldstein was flattered by the nice recruiting letter asking her to consider becoming one of "the few, the proud." But at age 78, she believes she's just a little old to enlist in the U.S. Marine Corps.
"I couldn't believe it," Goldstein told KCAL-TV on Friday. "My girls were sitting here ... we were in hysterics, we laughed so hard."
The letter told her the corps could use her unique language skills, but also warned that life as a Marine would test her physical and mental abilities "beyond anything you've ever known."
"There I am with my walker. I can't maneuver from here to there without it," said Goldstein, who added that her only language is English.
"I'll do whatever I could for this wonderful country we live in," she said. "But you know, this is kind of stretching it a bit."
The Marines ordinarily recruit people 18 to 27, said Maj. Joseph Kloppel, a corps spokesman. He said the letter must have been sent by mistake.
"Seventy-eight is obviously too old," Kloppel added
********************************************************************** 03-26-06, 12:03 PM RoverRoad It was obviously an error, but they are still getting desperate. Military recruiters are about as popular as skinheads these days.
The local recruiting office put up some flyers in the local laundry mat. (Their way of exploiting the poor). I've been wanting so badly to write something on the poster. "Join the Marines and get killed". But I figured there had to be some law against it so I let it go. But someone else did it anywaySmile
They are getting desperate. The poor minorities are getting too smart for them so they are having to exploit the older folks.
03-26-06, 12:28 PM Scotty
quote: U.S. Department of Defense Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) News Release
DoD Announces Recruiting and Retention Numbers for February The Department of Defense announced today its recruiting and retention statistics for the active and reserve components for the month of February.
Active duty recruiting. All services exceeded their recruiting goals in February.
Accessions Goal Percent
Army 6,114 6,000 102
Navy 2,696 2,593 104
Marine Corps 1,734 1,661 104
Air Force 2,375 2,353 101
Active duty retention. All services are projected to meet their retention goals for the current fiscal year.
Picture looks a little different from what you describe does it not?
My question to you would be, Why would you like it to be different. Do you support your Country or not?
03-26-06, 12:32 PM RoverRoad Of course you would accept that propaganda. For a while there they were falling short in every category, now after a little bad publicity, suddenly they are hitting every goal... In the middle of a war no less, yeah right. How stupid do they think we are?
quote: My question to you would be, Why would you like it to be different. Do you support your Country or not?
Same old tired Republican talking points... Try a different radio station...
03-26-06, 12:52 PM DorianGreyed Scotty, are these the original quotas or the revised quotas?
03-26-06, 12:56 PM RoverRoad The military only tells the public what they "need to know". There's always an official number that we don't see, and a public version that they give to Scotty.
03-26-06, 01:14 PM frankvan They raised the age limit to 39 for new recruits, eliminted the High School diploma requirment, and are now accepting recruits with minor offense convictions.
03-26-06, 01:16 PM Scotty
quote: Scotty, are these the original quotas or the revised quotas?
As far as I know, DG, these are original Quotas.
03-26-06, 01:18 PM Scotty
quote: The military only tells the public what they "need to know". There's always an official number that we don't see, and a public version that they give to Scotty.
RR, why don't you stick to things you know something about, like protesting the war and such. Roll Eyes
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed, 03-27-06 05:03 PM
03-26-06, 05:25 PM methos
quote:
Originally posted by Scotty:
quote:
Scotty, are these the original quotas or the revised quotas?
As far as I know, DG, these are original Quotas.
At this point in the last fiscal year (Oct.-Sept.), 27,4440 soldiers had been recruited. The number so far this year is 25,973.
Last year, 73,373 soldiers were recruited. The goal this year is 80,000 (as it was last year).
Recruitment is typically highest in the summer, so the total for the year will depend heavily on how that goes.
(all these numbers are from the Fox News version of an Associated Press report.)
Edit: The active duty Army's goal last February was 7,050, compared to 6,000 this year (Department of Defense). Had the goal been the same as last year, the Army would have fallen 13% short. It may be worth mentioning that some Reserve and Guard numbers were below goals this February (see Fox article).
03-27-06, 05:43 AM Scotty Actually this site is a little unbelievable. I try to post a little lighthearted humor, and it turns into an all out argument about the US military. I have to say that some of you are damn pathetic. Get a life or move somewhere that will make you happy.
Try Iran.
03-27-06, 06:00 AM RoverRoad This is only the internet... Calm down. Wink
03-27-06, 07:24 AM FredPuli Scotty, I'm with you on this one on this thread. At least nobody in it has called the President a liar (yet) Big Grin
03-27-06, 09:55 AM RoverRoad
quote: Originally posted by FredPuli: Scotty, I'm with you on this one on this thread. At least nobody in it has called the President a liar (yet) Big Grin
Goes without saying...
03-27-06, 05:05 PM DorianGreyed I have deleted one post in this thread and edited another. The personal insults need to stop.
03-27-06, 10:27 PM RoverRoad I think this thread just reflects the growing attitude of society. It wasn't always this way. I remember when I used to come here back in '02 and I'd post a liberal subject I would get bombarded by conservative agenda. I thought this site was outrageously right wing back then. Well, most of those people are still around, they just aren't posting on politics anymore. Back then I think Bush had an 80% approval rating, now he's at 34%. So this thread is just a reflection of how the pendulum is swinging back to the left. Big Grin
03-28-06, 05:28 AM Scotty
quote: So this thread is just a reflection of how the pendulum is swinging back to the left
Wishful thinking! Smile
03-28-06, 08:04 AM frankvan
quote: Originally posted by Scotty:
quote: So this thread is just a reflection of how the pendulum is swinging back to the left
Wishful thinking! Smile
Wishful thinking ?? Now that's wishful thinking! Roll Eyes
03-28-06, 02:13 PM Scotty
quote: Wishful thinking ?? Now that's wishful thinking!
Frank, you are such a comedian.Big Grin
03-29-06, 11:24 AM Kendor OOH RAH! Scotty, OOH RAH!
03-29-06, 01:56 PM Scotty Marines,looking for a few good .........
quote: OOH RAH! Scotty, OOH RAH!
Wink Semper Fi!
03-30-06, 09:28 PM RoverRoad Hey Scotty, how come your not in Iraq fighting? If you're such a patriot, shouldn't you strap on a gun and go over there? What are you doing home? How old are you?
03-30-06, 09:48 PM DorianGreyed RR, from what I understand, Scotty put in his time years ago, and, in any case, I don't consider anyone's service or lack thereof to be an issue in a discussion about the current war.
03-31-06, 12:22 AM RoverRoad The point I was trying to make is that most of the people that believe they are the most patriotic would never go and fight themselves, or be willing to send their own children to fight. I don't know what Scotties military history is, I really don't care. But I find it interesting that he likes to challenge everybody else’s patriotism.
If Scottie served than good for him, he is an exception to his fellow Republicans. But he needs to stop challenging the patriotism of people just because they don't support the war.
03-31-06, 02:29 AM DorianGreyed I think that among everyday Republicans over 50, you will find more served than Democrats of the same age. Among the higher incomes, I doubt that there is a difference. For what it's worth, I list below Presidents in my lifetime, who served, where they served, and a few other details.
Truman, Dem. - Missouri National Guard 1905-1911, Rejoined 1917, WWI, Captain, France
Eisenhower, Rep. - Graduate, West point 1915, General of the Army WWII, Numerous Decorations
Kennedy, Dem. - joined Navy Sept. 1941, served in Pacific WWII, Navy and Marine Corps Medal, Officer
Johnson, Dem. - Joined Naval Reserve June 1941, eventually served South Pacific, WWII, Officer, Possibly questionable Silver Star,
Nixon, Rep. - Served WWII, South Pacific, Officer
Ford, Rep. - Joined Naval Reserve June 1942, Served South Pacific WWII, Discharged as a lieutenant commander in February 1946
Carter, Dem. - Graduated US Naval Academy 1946, Resigned commissionm 1953, Officer
Reagan, Rep. - joined Army Reserves 1935, Activated 1942, Served in California and New York, Wrote Column for service newspaper, "Letters to Button Nose" letter to wife about how hard service was, how much he missed her, etc. Was able to hand deliver letters to wife at home since he was in California and lived at home most of the time during the war. Acted in or narrated 8 films during war. Discharged as Captain.
Bush I, Rep. - Joined Navy June 1942, commissioned as an ensign in the U.S. Naval Reserve on June 9, 1943, several days before his 19th birthday, which made him the youngest naval aviator to that date. Served WWII South Pacific. Distinguished Flying Cross, three Air Medals, and the Presidential Unit Citation, Discharged Lieutenant Junior Grade (?) Sept 1945.
Clinton, Dem. - Worked Selective Service System to avoid service during Vietnam War.
bush II. Rep. - Used Congressman father's influence to jump ahead of at least 100 others to join Texas National Guard during Vietnam War. The Guard No record exists of his finishing 6 year commitment. At the time of his Honorable Discharge, his father was ambassador to the United Nations (1971–1973), Republican National Committee chairman (1973–1974), Chief of the U.S. Liaison Office in the People's Republic of China (1974–1976). -------- What is interesting is that the US had the opportunity to but did not elect (or re-elect) George H.W. Bush (Distinguished Flying Cross, three Air Medals, WWII), Bob Dole (Bronze Star Medal, WWII), Albert Gore (volunteered to serve in Vietnam), and John Kerry (volunteered to serve in Vietnam, Silver Star, Bronze Star). Each time the choice was offered, voters chose the candidate with either lesser or no service. I think that Sen. John McCain, if he is the Republican nominee, will be the last war veteran to run for President for quite a while. Historically, about half of all US Presidents have military service. -------- "But he needs to stop challenging the patriotism of people just because they don't support the war."
We certainly agree here.
03-31-06, 05:41 AM RoverRoad I think people often get more conservative with age, so I won't argue that there probably are more conservatives than liberals over the age of 50 who were in the military, but were they conservative when they were in the service?
Isn’t it a fact that Republicans tend to be of the wealthy persuasion and Democrats tend to be, well, less than rich? Now given the choice between going to college and enlisting in the military, don’t you think most people would choose college. That only stands to reason that there would be more liberals in the military than conservatives. They probably come out of the service more conservative than they went in.
Did you watch that movie by the great American Patriot, Michael Moore, when he stood outside congress and asked several senators if they would be willing to send their own families to fight in Iraq, and all of them just laughed him off…
We may have more Republican presidents who have a more significant military past that our Democratic presidents, but that’s not a reflection of the general population..
03-31-06, 02:19 PM Scotty RR, just for your information. I served two combat tours in Vietnam as a Marine Corps Officer. Your crap about the Republicans not fighting is just that, crap.
quote: Did you watch that movie by the great American Patriot, Michael Moore, when he stood outside congress and asked several senators if they would be willing to send their own families to fight in Iraq, and all of them just laughed him off…
Why shouldn't they? This is laughable.
quote: Hey Scotty, how come your not in Iraq fighting? If you're such a patriot, shouldn't you strap on a gun and go over there? What are you doing home? How old are you?
I strapped on my guns twice and fought. How many time have you been? I would be there if I could, you see Vietnam sort of ended my combat service.
quote: I was that which others did not want to be.
I went where others feared to go, and did what others failed to do.
I asked nothing from those who gave nothing, and reluctantly accepted the thought of eternal loneliness ... should I fail.
I have seen the face of terror, felt the stinging cold of fear, and enjoyed the sweet taste of a moment's love.
I have cried, pained, and hoped ... but most of all, I have lived times others would say were best forgotten.
At least someday I will be able to say that I was proud of what I was ... a Marine.
03-31-06, 02:31 PM Scotty
quote: "But he needs to stop challenging the patriotism of people just because they don't support the war."
I question people that constantly put down the US military, and try to make it look bad. You seem to be a prime example of one of those people. You seem to take joy in the fact that the US military is in some way troubled by enlistments, and the treating of terrorists, etc. I never hear you say anything positive about the US military, your protector, and the protector of peace for this great country.
04-01-06, 03:00 AM RoverRoad
quote:
I never hear you say anything positive about the US military, your protector, and the protector of peace for this great country.
I am really tired of that kind of blind patriotism. There's more to this world than just the U.S... We need a good strong military, but right now they are not protecting me or any other American citizens. If anything, they are only making us more vulnerable to future attacks, after all, it's the very policy of us butting our noses into foreign matters that have nothing to do with us that got us 9/11 in the first place.
It's not the militaries fault, they are only following orders. I don't blame you or anybody in the service for this mess that we are in. I blame Bush just as mush as I blame Bin Laden, and I don't blame Saddam at all!
This message has been edited. Last edited by: RoverRoad, 04-01-06 03:38 AM
04-01-06, 04:25 AM Dwight
quote: ...but right now they are not protecting me or any other American citizens. RoverRoad
I'm quite sure that you did not mean to say that. I would guess that you meant that their mission in Iraq is not protecting American citizens. The US service men and women are most definitly protecting American citizens from those external forces that would attack us if they thought they could get away with it. Only the presence of the US military prevents attack.
Dwight
04-01-06, 05:29 AM RoverRoad
quote: Originally posted by Dwight: you meant that their mission in Iraq is not protecting American citizens.
Yes, that is what I meant . 04-01-06, 10:50 AM Scotty
quote: I am really tired of that kind of blind patriotism. There's more to this world than just the U.
I really don't know what to say to this kind of logic.
quote: but right now they are not protecting me or any other American citizens
Wow! Thank you, Dwight, you can be more diplomatic to this kind of situation than I could ever be.
04-02-06, 08:28 PM Scotty What about Iran RR, do you think that we should take military action against them, or just pacify them until they blow up a US ship in the Persian Gulf?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 3165 | Location: From the Mountains to the Sea. | Registered: 06-08-02
