He said, "If there’s anyone who believes these youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon and some generals have said, you can just forget about it. No bright young individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment."
2006-12-01 12:45:03 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Because those that are against the war like to play the "hero" role and "stick up" for the poor soldiers forced against their will to fight (note my sarcasm). It just shows how uneducated they are about the attitudes of those in the military. Not to mention the fallacies in his statement, the military right now has a slightly higher percentage of service members with college degrees than the civilian population. So obviously it's not the overwhelming majority of those from poor backgrounds with no choices in life like people like to think.
2006-12-01 12:52:45 · answer #1 · answered by biochemgirl 2 · 4⤊ 3⤋
I think you have been misled by Rush and Hannity, the figures speak for them selves. We have lowered our standards EVERY month since the first Gulf war and still are barely making the quotas. In many fields we are scrapping the bottom of the barrel, the Government has had to hire contractors to preform maintenance on everything from aircraft to tanks. (The Air Force and Navy are an exception as in many cases the Marines). EVERY instance were there has been rape, killings or laws broken the people involved have PROVEN to be convicts, mental cases or so low down on the food chain that a snail is higher. Believe what you want I have been there and now my son calls crying saying "dad, I am going to be killed these guys are idiots and cannot deal or handle anything".
God Bless You, our men and women along with the Southern People.
2006-12-01 20:41:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't know who he is as I'm from Australia, but "no bright individuals want to fight" is a poor choice of words any way you look at it.
Someone should have thrown back at him, then what do make of the leaders who send them to war!? How bright are they?!
I do agree there are some US soldiers coming from communities of high unemployment etc and this is a stereotype and in some parts absolutely correct. I've seen goofball soldiers on You tube and CNN etc which lives up to the stereotype, but I know it's naive to label them all like this, as there are many patriotic people who wish to serve and who are intelligent and brave.
For someone well known to pigeonhole all US soldiers in this fashion is pretty poor, from a supposed good public speaker. It would not be too hard to actually research all the US military and their age and social demographic, if he then said what he said based on these figures...then okay.
...from my limited exposre to this and the comment I feel it's illadvised and pretty poor, which generals said what?!, he doesn't say anything and makes just a poor general comment...
A good example of immediate proof that the opposite may be true is than US pro footballer that gave up a tens of millions contract in the NFL to serve in the US military out of gratitude to his country(& paid the ultimate price), not to mention US Presidents and alike that have served in wars...
I'd say he thinks they're stupid because he is either illadvised and doesn't research his answers, or he may be stupid himself in some respects.
2006-12-01 13:11:03 · answer #3 · answered by 67ImpalaSS 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the two the Dem's' and re pubs' can infrequently agree on something even whilst they choose the comparable element. except you bypass to c-span you will no longer see plenty coverage of one/3 party applicants. super firms make huge contributions to applicants they help,you're constrained in how plenty you may donate to a candidate for my area. firms set up committees and communities to assist and fund applicants. the latest financial disaster rules have been written by the banking marketplace for congress to make into regulation and it bit them in the butt. the different situation is that some human beings vote for a million party for all time,the two as a results of fact they help that party for all time and have self assurance it quite is the only party to do whats ideal,or they are upset with the different party for some reason. the two events choose it their way and could compromise some to get their way. If what I examine on the internet final evening is even a million/2 real,this election won't remember besides. If we've yet another attack like 9/11 or a important catastrophe in the past the elections F.E.M.A . will take administration and George Bush will develop into the real ability of government. If it happens after the elections and in the past the recent president takes place of work,i do no longer understand what is going to ensue. G.W. signed an govt order for the continuity of government and F.E.M.A. will take over and droop the form and the President could be the cohesion govt. Congress and the extraordinary court docket will nevertheless exist yet could have little or no voice,the President has the perfect say in all concerns. there replaced into additionally yet another website speaking relating to the formation of the North American Union (Canada,U.S. and Mexico forming a union like the E.U. and the U.S. shape would be long gone.
2016-10-17 14:24:56 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
American soldiers are NOT stupid, What is stupid is that they are not allowed to use any initiative in action,!..Its always been an American problem, It is why you suffer unnecessary causality's, and your 'ops' invariably fail1..Johnny on the spot is not permitted to use his own judgement and has to use time to consult with some Colonel 50 miles away!..In Vietnam, we, {Australians} were terrified of ops with US troops, because of the absurd command structure!..And it hasn't changed a bit!..No.. American soldiers are very good..If well lead.They are not stupid, and anyone who says they are has never had anything to do with them!.BUT!..Your command structure of generals making stupid decisions on political grounds are very stupid!,,Get rid of 'em!..And save a lot of lives!.
2006-12-01 15:10:25 · answer #5 · answered by paranthropus2001 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Mr. Rangel knows that in the current volunteer military, people are turned down who can't pass math and other academic tests, as well as passing physical requirements. He wants to force unwilling people into the military as a way of increasing anti-war activities. During the Vietnam War, with the Draft, the protests were more widespread. Mr. Rangel enjoys causing chaos if he is able. He's just jerking people around.
In Montana many people join because they love our country. They aren't poor or unemployed. That's how most of the central part of the country is.
2006-12-01 12:51:13 · answer #6 · answered by Susan M 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Rangel can be an idiot, but I'm not sure that's what he said or thinks. He didn't mean that if any really want to fight, they must be the stupid ones. He meant, mistakenly, that they didn't want to fight in an unwinnable and unjustifiable war. But he was also wrong about that. Our soldiers do fight, regardless, and die, regardless, and get shot up, regardless. They fight to protect each other, and to protect their honor as men at arms, and live up to the traditions set by those of us - and yes I am one - who fought in wars before them.
They shouldn't have to be there, but as long as they are, they will keep the faith.
2006-12-01 13:01:38 · answer #7 · answered by Grist 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Because Charlie Rangel is Anti American...
2006-12-01 12:52:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
To be fair, in many situations he is correct. But i'm sure what he said does not apply to every soldier.
Very few democrats, let alone republicans, even like Rangel. No one will support his laws. That man is pathetic.
2006-12-01 12:50:20 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
He is right. It does nothing to discredit the bravery of our troops, but most of the infantry do come from underprivileged homes.
The good thing is that the military can give them a future. It is the greatest institution in the history of the world.
2006-12-01 12:49:31 · answer #10 · answered by billy d 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋