PDA

View Full Version : Eastside group warns parents of military recruiting in schools



thedrifter
06-03-04, 08:44 AM
Eastside group warns parents of military recruiting in schools

By Leslie Fulbright
Seattle Times Eastside bureau

Todd Boyle knows service personnel regularly promote the military in his son's high-school cafeteria. He knows recruiters are allowed to call his 15-year-old boy at home, invite him for pizza and pitch military benefits like camaraderie, health care and scholarships.
His main concern, though, is that other parents don't know.

The Bellevue father and some other Eastside parents are working to get the word out about recruiting activities in schools at a time they feel the armed forces are aggressively targeting their children.

The parents are among a growing number of "counter-recruiters" nationwide, fueled in part by a law signed by President Bush in 2002 that gave the military greater access to teens through their schools.

"I really don't think parents realize the amount of recruiting going on in the school system," said Boyle, 52. "That irritates me."

Boyle's son attends Lake Washington High School in Kirkland, where military recruiters set up tables every Tuesday. A different service branch comes each week, said Peter Daniels, a district spokesman.

"Access in the schools is really good," said Staff Sgt. Claude Cruse, a Marine Corps recruiter in Bellevue. "We are able to go and look for people who are motivated to do something for their country."

The recruiters talk to students about incentives: making a difference in the world, protecting freedom, money for college, apprenticeship programs and excellent medical benefits.

But Boyle sees the duty differently and tries to tell his undecided son about the dangers of being an infantryman, the living conditions, the incidental salary and the lack of compensation for soldiers who are mentally or physically injured during war.

Boyle belongs to a group called Washington Truth in Recruiting, or WaTiR, which is organizing community workshops to connect with youngsters and parents and give not-so-glamorous information about military life. So far, they have held meetings in Kirkland, Bellevue and Duvall.

"We are organizing to try and let parents know how their children are being affected," said Marion Ward of Bellevue, a WaTiR member. "Parents think recruiters only come in on career day and that is simply not the case."

WaTiR's goal is not to protest, the group says, but to offer another point of view as the military spends millions of dollars to get kids to enlist. The group also wants to let parents know that a small provision in President Bush's No Child Left Behind law requires schools to give information on juniors and seniors to the Pentagon or lose federal funding.

In front of Eastside high schools, WaTiR members distribute opt-out forms that allow parents or students to choose not to have their name, address or phone numbers released to the military. The forms are also available in the schools.

"Before the law, the school could decide not to give us the students' names and we would have to put together lists on our own," said Verna Rossevelt, an Army spokeswoman.

"Now, they have to give it to us. They have to provide us the same access as they do to colleges and other potential employers."

The Pentagon gets the names of students 15 and older, and military recruiters can call the students, talk to them at school and make personal visits. Before the law, many schools only allowed the recruiters in on career day.

"The (No Child Left Behind) act is an asset in the recruiting effort," said Phuong Chau, a spokesman for the Marines. "But we were also successful without it. The mandate by the federal government just helps reduce the cost of recruiting by making the effort more efficient."

Vicky Monk is one parent who wishes she would have known more about school recruiters.

The Sammamish woman said her teen met with a recruiter for six months off and on without her knowledge and then decided to quit school, take the GED and join the Army. He is in Iraq.

Monk said the recruiter courted the teenager, taking him out to eat and to chat about how the Army could positively change his life. Together, Monk's son and the recruiter decided the 17-year-old would enlist when he turned 18.

"I knew nothing about this plan until he needed my permission to take the GED," Monk said. "I wanted to talk about college and other alternatives, but he had already made up his mind."

Rossevelt, the Army spokeswoman, said it is not uncommon for recruiters to deal only with the student. Parental involvement is not officially required until the young person decides to enlist.

"But it's not like we kidnap them," said Bill Pearce, an Army spokesman. The timing on when the parents get involved is up to the recruiters and it depends on the situation, he said.

"Some teens want to go right home and sit down with the parents," he said. "Others don't.

"The last thing we want are enthusiastic kids and disapproving parents."

Monk did not approve and tried to dissuade her son, but he enlisted and then went to basic training in 2001. "I tried to tell him it wasn't all fun and games like they made it sound," Monk said. "I told him 'If we go to war, you will have to go.' "

Tim Monk was sent to Iraq 14 months ago and does not know when he will come home. His mission with the Fort Lewis-based 1st Armored Division in Baghdad was set to end a few weeks ago, but the division is being forced to stay under a stop-loss order, which forbids it from leaving when the military is stretched thin.

Monk thinks that if she could have been part of the process, her cons may have outweighed the recruiter's pros.

"Parents need to know that these recruiters are making decisions with their kids and excluding them from the process," Monk said. "This is too important a decision for parents to be left out of."

WaTiR is working on the Eastside because that's where the members live. The group hopes to become a statewide educational organization and work with school counselors to develop peace-studies alternatives.

"Our kids need a more balanced military point of view," Boyle said. "Learning to drive a tank is not going to help you when you get out. Our view helps students make an informed decision."

So far, in the Bellevue School District, 171 students have opted to have their information withheld, said Elizabeth Noagi, a spokeswoman.

Leslie Fulbright: 206-515-5637 or lfulbright@seattletimes.com


Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company



Recruiting and the law


Section 9528 of the No Child Left Behind Act states that each local educational agency receiving assistance under the act shall provide, on a request made by military recruiters or an institution of higher education, access to secondary-school students' names, addresses and telephone listings.
A secondary-school student or the parent of the student may request that the student's name, address and telephone listing not be released without prior written parental consent.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001945994_recruit03e.html


The Drifter's Wife

Ellie
:no:

Kegler300
06-03-04, 08:49 AM
They're all for the defense of our Nation just as long as it's not their son or daughter doing the defending. What hypocrites.

USMCWifeNMom
06-03-04, 09:01 AM
They're all for defending the Nation when THEY deem it necessary ... but you're correct ... they want to be defended, they just don't want to defend themselves. Shame on them.

"My kid is a Marine so yours can enjoy college."

Margot Shinn
PROUD Wife of SgtMaj Charles Shinn - 4th LAAD Bn SgtMaj
PROUD Mom of Cpl Sarah Lane - HMH 769
PROUD Mom-in-Law of Sgt Owen Lane - HMM 764 (DEPLOYED OIF II)
PROUD Mom-in-Law of LCpl "Drew" Andrews - 1st MAR Reg (DEPLOYED OIF II)
PROUD Aunt of LCpl Tim Collins - 1/1 "C" Co (DEPLOYED OIF II)

thedrifter
06-03-04, 09:28 AM
I see nothing wrong with recruiters coming in and talking over with the children, explaining what they can do for them.....All 4 of my children listened to this....

At the time they were in they could not offer them what they all ready accomplished....They had free scholarships to the college they wanted to attend.....Even the Marine Recruiter said he couldn't match it......

Since all 4 are still at the age of the draft, they already stated to me, before they get drafted they would all enlist in the Marine Corps...They stated they want to make Their Father Proud, and they know he would be right by their side.....

My oldest is still in college....but will put it on hold......

As Parents we are here to guide our children......Not tell them what to do with their lives.........


Ellie

CPLRapoza
06-03-04, 09:55 AM
it's these people who are going to ruin the country. why don't we listen to them you know. Just stop recruiting all together, and just keep the military going until everyone is faise out, and when our country gets overrun and their grandkids are getting taught arabic or whatever other language, then they can complain about how F@$ked up they were. g0d d@mn liberals.

enviro
06-03-04, 11:24 AM
That article was so full of crap from the people interviewed it made me sick.

First, dangers of being an infantryman, the living conditions, the incidental salary and the lack of compensation for soldiers who are mentally or physically injured during war.

What a misinformed idiot. You don't have to be infantry, the living conditions are better than most college campuses now days, and as a disabled vet, I will tell you that I get better compensation and care from the VA than what my current employer would provide. Dumbass!

Second, WTF with the GED? I know that the Marines, AF, and Navy wouldn't have allowed that. Somehow, I'm thinking that this story about the GED is old, or just plain BS. Things have changed. GED is not acceptable anymore.

Third, these parents just have no freaking clue as to how much better off they would be. I sure hope they plan on paying for college. Then the kid has to actually finish college. Then he actually has to get lucky and get a job for $17,000 a year because he has no experience. By the time he completed four years in the Marines and was promoted to Sergeant, he'd be making about $24,000 in basic pay alone.

College, room & board, experience, lifeskills, responsibility, medical, dental, and SO MUCH MORE are given to the military for working their ass off.

These parents that are "shielding" their kids are neglecting them through misinformation and ignorance.


For statistical purposes only, a married Sergeant living in San Diego after 10 years of service makes about $50,000.00 a year.

A Staff Sergeant with the same info and 12 years makes about $56,000 a year.

Your average civilian with a degree (no prior experience) after 10 years: $42,000 minus benefit costs (healthcare co-pays, etc..)
Your average civilian with a degree (no prior experience) after 10 years: $42,500 minus benefit costs (healthcare co-pays, etc..)

TracGunny
06-03-04, 11:28 AM
If I remember correctly, the law alluded to that President Bush signed into law in 2002 did nothing more than give Military Recruiters the same access rights to High Schools and University's that the Private Sector was enjoying - seems there were/are some schools/colleges that allow Corporate America to recruit their kids but close the doors on the mean ol' Military...

CplCrotty
06-03-04, 11:38 AM
The New Your Times reading-Starbucks latte drinking-Kerry voting-"gender neutral"-military hating-liberal elite socialists strike again!

There's a new snob on the block, and they are known as the liberal elite - spoied baby boomers who have a permanent inferiority complex with all things military.

And is a "college education" really what it use to be? Not when about 95% of the faculty on just about every college campus fall within the above mentioned category.

MillRatUSMC
06-03-04, 03:02 PM
http://www.watir.org/presentations.htm
Their agena...I think these folks are "left" over from the 60's and 70's.
What they did as a group, they now do on the web.
It gives them a bigger group to hit with their ideas of "Freedom".
Freedom isn't FREE...it takes men and women with a weapon to uphold the law of the land.
Who going to do for all seeking an out of doing their duty?
Not these fools...
They have something there about bringing back the "draft".
Some say no way would they serve with someone that was drafted and does not want to serve.
Yet during Vietnam, when some were drafted into the Marine Corps, they did as well as those that enlisted.
A "Draft" would do away with these "Stop-Loss" programs that the Army is now using dued to a short fall on manpower in the Army.
Those "Stop-Loss" programs do nothing for an Army who's morale is way down dued to all these investigations of prisoner abuse in Iraq.
Now even with a college degree many can't find work due to the outsourcing of high skills job to countries that offer cheap labor markets...
Pray for America!!!


Semper Fidelis/Semper Fi
Ricardo

yellowwing
06-03-04, 03:25 PM
Some of their points
"The purpose of the U.S. military is to fight and win wars and civil conflicts. The purpose of recruiting is to enlist people to fight these wars and conflicts, not to provide a good experience to soldiers.
Overall I had a great experience in my active duty years! The Marine Corps has made be a better human being.

"The truth of the matter is that society doesn't even come close to repairing the harms or compensating its soldiers for their losses and injuries in wars."
We've never have been paid enough. That's why it has always been a moral imperitive to serve. Service may be a strange concept to this group.

"There is no credible military threat to the U.S. in the near future."
Who are they kidding!

fulmetaljackass
06-03-04, 03:42 PM
"There is no credible military threat to the U.S. in the near future."

There will be if we allow their kind of thinking to weaken our military!

MillRatUSMC
06-03-04, 03:42 PM
"There is no credible military threat to the U.S. in the near future."
Who are they kidding!

Read the other day that China was playing war games of what our response would be in regards to them making a move towards Tiawan.
That one credible military threat.

Terrorists planning another attack here this summer.
That other credible threat.

Than there's North Korea messing with nuclear weapons and rockets with the range to hit our west coast...watchout SparrowHawk!!!
That other credible military threat...
well you get the idea where I'm heading...They must have their head in the ground like an ostrich...

Semper Fidelis/Semper Fi
Ricardo

cjwright90
06-03-04, 04:13 PM
Pray is right, Ricardo!

HardJedi
06-03-04, 07:45 PM
Hell, has there EVER been a credible threat? one that people were just all ready to join up for? sure, AFTER Pearl Harbor. when else? at least in the last 100 years or so?

people with no sense of duty have alway's been against the military and alway's will be. I REALLY thought the whole 9/11 thing would have woken America up. As usual, however, people quickly forget. so sad really.

mississippiboy
06-04-04, 02:46 AM
I really wish these type of people would try to realize more of what could happen in the future if we do not have a strong military. No one every would have thought that the Japanese would have been able to have suprised us like they did on December 7, or that terrorists would attack on Septmeber 11. Without a strong military in our country we not only have a weakened defense, but also a weakened deterent against future attacks. A famous statement from a Japanese Admiral of WWII "I fear we have done nothing but to awaken a sleeping giant". We will not be much of a giant any more if we have no rucruitment and retension will only hold us for so long without good recuitment. I have tried to get into the military for the better part of 8 years now and have finally been succesful in doing so and will serve to the best of my ability, I hope that there are others that will continue to do the same and that there will be supportive parents of the efforts of the military. I hope that one day no one has to be put into harms way, but until that day I fully support the strong military that our country has become known for. I don't even want to think of what could happen in the future if these types of organizations get their way and recruiting levels drop dramatically due to it.

mississippiboy
06-04-04, 02:48 AM
U.S. causes China to rethink military strategy, Pentagon says
WASHINGTON (AP) ? The speed with which U.S. ground forces captured Baghdad and the prominent role played in Iraq by U.S. commandos have led China to rethink how it could counteract the American military in the event of a confrontation over Taiwan, the Pentagon says.
The Chinese also believe, partly from its assessment of the Bush administration's declared war on terrorism, that the United States is increasingly likely to intervene in a conflict over Taiwan or other Chinese interests, according to the Pentagon analysis.
"Authoritative commentary and speeches by senior officials suggest that U.S. actions over the past decade ... have reinforced fears within the Chinese leadership that the United States would appeal to human rights and humanitarian concerns to intervene, either overtly or covertly," said the Pentagon.
The assessments are in an annual Defense Department report to Congress on Chinese military power. The Pentagon took the unusual step of releasing the report late Saturday night.
The report said China is rethinking the concept that U.S. airpower alone is sufficient to prevail in a conflict ? a concept it inferred from the 1999 air war over Kosovo, which involved no U.S. ground forces.
"The speed of coalition ground force advances and the role of special forces in (Iraq) have caused the People's Liberation Army theorists to rethink their assumptions about the value of long-range precision strikes, independent of ground forces, in any Taiwan conflict scenario," the report said.
Because China's leaders believe their military forces are not yet strong enough to compete directly with the American military, they are putting more emphasis on preventing U.S. intervention first. This includes development of what the Chinese call "assassin's mace" weapons, the Pentagon said.
The report said U.S. officials are not sure what "assassin's mace" is.
"However, the concept appears to include a range of weapon systems and technologies related to information warfare, ballistic and anti-ship cruise missiles, advanced fighters and submarines, counterspace system and air defense," according to the Pentagon.
The report said that while the concept of "assassin's mace" is not new in China, it has appeared more frequently in Chinese professional journals since 1999, particularly in the context of Taiwan, the U.S.-supported island which split from China after its communist takeover in 1949.
Beijing considers Taiwan to be Chinese territory and has threatened to take it by force.
In Beijing on Sunday, officials said President Bush had reassured Chinese officials that Washington will stick to its "one-China policy" toward Taiwan. That long-standing policy says the American government recognizes Beijing as the only legitimate Chinese government, although the United States also has pledged to provide enough defensive equipment to Taiwan to assure its security.
Bush's comments to Chinese President Hu Jintao, released by China's Foreign Ministry, appeared to be an attempt to soothe Beijing's anger over Washington's decision to permit Taiwanese Vice President Annette Lu to stop in two U.S. cities before and after a Latin America tour.
The Pentagon for several years has expressed concern at China's military modernization, especially its emphasis on deploying more shorter-range ballistic missiles that can strike Taiwan.
The latest Pentagon report also said that since it last reported to Congress a year ago, China's imports of armaments have increase by 7% in value. These include a $1 billion deal for 24 Russian Su-30 fighter aircraft and $500 million for Russian SA-20 surface-to-air missile systems.

mississippiboy
06-05-04, 02:51 AM
The Pentagon for several years has expressed concern at China's military modernization, especially its emphasis on deploying more shorter-range ballistic missiles that can strike Taiwan.
The latest Pentagon report also said that since it last reported to Congress a year ago, China's imports of armaments have increase by 7% in value. These include a $1 billion deal for 24 Russian Su-30 fighter aircraft and $500 million for Russian SA-20 surface-to-air missile systems.


Reason to be prepared?
I should think so.