Would You Volunteer for This Group?

If even a fraction of this is true then why would one volunteer for the US military?

The most appealing explanation lies in the motives of those driving this ostensibly schizophrenic conduct. Plainly, they view sexual morals as something to be manipulated for the accomplishment of political objectives. Hence, lewd and offensive sexual conduct can be deliberately used as a tactic against detainees. On the other hand, officers who earn the leadership’s ire will be humiliated and disgraced using innuendo of sexual misconduct as a tactic.
The cynicism and immorality of this mindset is staggering. It reflects a wholesale repudiation of traditional military values.
One can well question the efficacy of sexual humiliation practices as tools for interrogation and intelligence gathering. However, no one can question their highly inflammatory effect in the War on Terror: they tarnish America’s reputation and put our soldiers at risk. And they may well claim another victim. Experts are already noting that at Rumsfeld’s current burn rate, the volunteer army cannot be sustained much longer. Rumsfeld’s cynical sexual policies are destroying military morale and discipline and hastening the volunteer army’s demise.

Yep, why would anyone volunteer for this environment? Unless, well, they think they might like it….
Read all of Scott Horton’s post: Sexual Perversion in Rumsfeld’s Pentagon.

Who Needs a Draft?

With recruiting techniques like this?
This young man’s experience with military recruiters started while he was still in high school. Perhaps this is one of those areas where a parental consent law might make some sense especially to those who value life. Something along the lines of:

No representative of a military organization or any other organization that trains people to kill may contact any individual below the age of 21 without written permission of the individual’s parents. No individual below the age of 21 may join or enlist in the above referenced organization without written approval of their parents.

Yes, in answer to your first questions. The above does say parents which is plural which means both parents must sign. Second, I picked 21 and not 18 as individuals in the US have been restrained from the full execution of their rights (alcohol consumption for example) until they are 21.

Impending Draft?

If recruiting doesn’t meet the needs then expect a push for a draft no matter what the candidates say today:

Compounding the difficulty of recruiting, Nunes said, is the fact that seven out of 10 people who walk through the front door of a recruiting office aren’t qualified for the military, for reasons ranging from criminal history to an inappropriate tattoo. The goal is to enlist at least one of the remaining three.
Colleges are the competition
Who knows which tattoos are inappropriate enough to keep you out? Seems this might be useful information to a lot folks in case a draft does come around.
Update: Mark Kleiman posts Yes, Virginia, there could be a draft.

Supremes Sing for bush?

Arthur Silber isn’t very happy with the rulings in Hamdi, Padilla and Rasul:

…as Turley notes, the fact that these questions arose in this form in the first place — questions that lie at the very foundation of what was our original system of government — is a very ominous sign, a sign whose significance a great many people appear not to appreciate fully, if at all.

MORE CONFIRMATION: Of my view — if the Wall Street Journal is pleased about the Supreme Court’s rulings, you can be pretty damned sure that they’re bad news for the defenders of individual rights:
Now I’m not as happy with these rulings as I was two days ago.

bush’s shocktroops

I thought we fought WWII to get rid of this kind of stuff:

The defense offered by the GOP’s local functionaries is that the soldiers asked to attend the rally “so they could show their support for their commander-in-chief before getting shipped out to fight the war on terrorism.”
And, of course, they were also given those t-shirts to wear. So at least they weren’t in uniform.
So how could anyone – except maybe some pinko terrorist lover – complain about something so innocuous?
Well I wouldn’t – if not for the fact that we already have several thousand years of history to draw on for examples of what happens when the armed forces of a powerful state dabble in politics – or, worse still, allow themselves to be transformed into the personal shocktroops of a political leader or party.

Your assignment: Read the original news article and the rest of Bilmon’s long post.
Study question: What is the role of the military in a free society?