All-female crews

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Snaqwells

You might be right, but you won't prove it, even though you say it's fact. You offer one unverified statistic; that most use the GI Bill. Logical reasoning does not lead me to believe that everyone who uses the GI Bill joined just to pay for school. Every military member with dependents also gets a housing allowance, but I doubt you'd claim we got married (or had kids) just to get the housing allowance.
For crying out loud, just admit you misspoke and we can all move on. You made a decent point, that going willy-nilly into a war is not a good idea; and that people in the military don't generally want a war if it's not necessary. But it was drowned out by your insistence on holding to unverified claims of fact.

Adam

Now I am suppose to say I misspoke on an issue that I believe to be true. So you are telling me, I have to back off my statments because you cannot prove that they are wrong? So you are telling me that you cannot prove any information that I said was completely wrong, even thought you do not even seem to understand my point at all about percentages? I will state this so that you can educate yourself that the uses of the statistics for me is not really about the actual number. For me the statistics illustrate the disproportionate number of African-Americans or Blacks that join the military and cannot get those same opportunities elsewhere. So the fact that African-Americans have to join the military to get education for schooling and job training to even be considered for military and disproportionally have to be put in harms way for a war that they might not politically believe in. If you just look at the numbers that voted for President Bush and those the percentages that will vote for him in the next election, to go fight in a war does not believe you want to serve your country in this capacity. So if over 50 percent of a specific population is voting for a particular person, but being put in harms way on a higher percentage, I find something extreamely wrong with that. You can argue whether the percentage is 24% or 35%, the fact still remains to me something is out of wack.

But to come back to to the G.I. Bill issue, I still have not seen anyone that proves me wrong statistically. I wonder why you guys do not spend the same issue claiming that people officiating is about the "good ole boy network." I do not see anyone asking for proof or asking for a statistical breakdown. There are people that believe this to be totally true and I do not see the claims to prove that information. It is the case in our state and many other aspects of life, but I do not see you going all over the board claiming that someone "misspoke."

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by mikesears


I don't doubt the military uses all means at its disposal to get people to join. It's kind of like recruiting for any major life event. Colleges will woo prospective athletes through any means available to them. I doubt the military is any different and the G.I. bill would seem like a major advantage to poorer people considering college.

For me this is not about what the Military uses to get people to join. I am personally of a generation that this deals with primarily. Dan even gave a site that dealt with 18-24, I am much closer to that age group than many are here (by what the individuals claim their age is). I went to school and work with people that used the military to get education funding. Many National Guard and Reserves members are former students that are in Iraq now!! But I guess someone will claim that statement is wrong. So be it, life goes on.

Peace

[gsf23]

Rut

According to the Department of Veteren Affairs, that is the department that handles the GI Bill, only 57% of those eligible actually used their GI Bill benefits.

http://www.army.mil/soldiers/mar2002...mar0222-23.pdf

These are the latest statistics I could find, but I doubt that it has changed much.

[Adam]

Call me a glutton...
Rut, with regard to the GI Bill. Your claim that everyone who uses the GI Bill joined the military for that purpose is not supported by reason.
I have not said you are wrong. I don't know. You have said this is a statistical fact, I haven't even claimed your wrong. I do maintain (opinion alert) that you shouldn't back something up as fact (rather than opinion) if you can't back it up. I did offer reasoning as to why I think you're wrong. You haven't even addressed the fact that people who stay beyond their initial enlistment cannot place education at the top of their priority list.

WRT the population distribution of the military. The only place I found anything above 30% was in reference to either African-American women, over 30% of women in the Army are African-American. Wait, I just found another. 36% of all military personnel in support and administrative roles are African-American. While their level of vulnerability is assuredly larger than my wife's, they're not going into combat. African-Amercians make up 15% of the infantry-type units. I suppose this is larger than the 12% figure you gave for the general population, but I question whether it is a large enough difference to make one upset. But, that's a judgment call.
As for reasons why the numbers are higher, I'll grant that one reason is likely (alert, the following is my opinion and not a statement of fact) along your reasoning. That for many, it is the only (or easiest) way to earn a decent living. I'm not sure that's it's a bad thing that the option is there. It's not a problem with the military, it's a problem with the economy in general.

I ask the question again. Why does the 20% figure bother you?

Adam

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Snaqwells
Call me a glutton...
Rut, with regard to the GI Bill. Your claim that everyone who uses the GI Bill joined the military for that purpose is not supported by reason.

If you are going to quote me, quote me properly. I did not say anything about "everyone that uses the GI Bill." I said that most of the people that go into the military today, use the opportunity to get funding for education.

Originally posted by Snaqwells

I have not said you are wrong. I don't know. You have said this is a statistical fact, I haven't even claimed your wrong. I do maintain (opinion alert) that you shouldn't back something up as fact (rather than opinion) if you can't back it up. I did offer reasoning as to why I think you're wrong. You haven't even addressed the fact that people who stay beyond their initial enlistment cannot place education at the top of their priority list.

If I state something, use a statistic that contradicts it. Do not just tell me how I should have formed the argument or what I should have not said. I am a grown *** man, I can say anything I choose no matter what you think. This is a free country. I think George Bush is an a horrible President and is going into this war for self-servicing reasons.

Originally posted by Snaqwells


I ask the question again. Why does the 20% figure bother you?

I will let you tell me. You know everthing else I should have done.

Peace

[Striker991]

Originally posted by JRutledge

That is a statistical fact. We have a volunteer Military. Most of the individuals that are in the Military have used the Military to get an education. Most of todays Military used the G.I. Bill or joined as a reserve to pay for the education. Over 30% of the Military is African-American alone and most used the Military to go to college. I know of several people now that have been deployed to Iraq or sent in support of this war, all in those cases got money for their educations. If that is a generalization, show me that it is not true. But I really do not care if you show it, prove it or not. The information is out there and you can find it or not.

Peace

Here is your direct quote. So, if you are going to quote yourself, do it correctly. I don't wish to get into this debate. However, I couldn't resist pointing out that you, my friend, are a double-talker.

That's all.