The Lengths the US Armed Forces are going to recruit...

[SirFozzie]

Wow.. this article is from last month, but it's really telling how far the US Armed Forces are going to recruit. Surprised this didn't get more play. I'll post the follow up article as well:

Link to article


By SUSAN PAYNTER
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER COLUMNIST

For mom Marcia Cobb and her teenage son Axel, the white letters USMC on their caller ID soon spelled, "Don't answer the phone!"

Marine recruiters began a relentless barrage of calls to Axel as soon as the mellow, compliant Sedro-Woolley High School grad had cut his 17th birthday cake. And soon it was nearly impossible to get the seekers of a few good men off the line.

With early and late calls ringing in their ears, Marcia tried using call blocking. And that's when she learned her first hard lesson. You can't block calls from the government, her server said. So, after pleas to "Please stop calling" went unanswered, the family's "do not answer" order ensued.

But warnings and liquid crystal lettering can fade. So, two weeks ago when Marcia was cooking dinner Axel goofed and answered the call. And, faster than you can say "semper fi," an odyssey kicked into action that illustrates just how desperate some of the recruiters we've read about really are to fill severely sagging quotas.

Let what we learned serve as a warning to other moms, dads and teens, the Cobbs now say. Even if your kids actually may want to join the military, if they hope to do it on their own terms, after a deep breath and due consideration, repeat these words after them: "No," "Not now" and "Back off!"

"I've been trained to be pretty friendly. I guess you might even say I'm kind of passive," Axel told me last week, just after his mother and older sister had tracked him to a Seattle testing center and sprung him on a ruse.

The next step of Axel's misadventure came when he heard about a cool "chin-ups" contest in Bellingham, where the prize was a free Xbox. The now 18-year-old Skagit Valley Community College student dragged his tail feathers home uncharacteristically late that night. And, in the morning, Marcia learned the Marines had hosted the event and "then had him out all night, drilling him to join."

A single mom with a meager income, Marcia raised her kids on the farm where, until recently, she grew salad greens for restaurants.

Axel's father, a Marine Corps vet who served in Vietnam, died when Axel was 4.

Clearly the recruiters knew all that and more.

"You don't want to be a burden to your mom," they told him. "Be a man." "Make your father proud." Never mind that, because of his own experience in the service, Marcia says enlistment for his son is the last thing Axel's dad would have wanted.

The next weekend, when Marcia went to Seattle for the Folklife Festival and Axel was home alone, two recruiters showed up at the door.

Axel repeated the family mantra, but he was feeling frazzled and worn down by then. The sergeant was friendly but, at the same time, aggressively insistent. This time, when Axel said, "Not interested," the sarge turned surly, snapping, "You're making a big (bleeping) mistake!"

Next thing Axel knew, the same sergeant and another recruiter showed up at the LaConner Brewing Co., the restaurant where Axel works. And before Axel, an older cousin and other co-workers knew or understood what was happening, Axel was whisked away in a car.

"They said we were going somewhere but I didn't know we were going all the way to Seattle," Axel said.

Just a few tests. And so many free opportunities, the recruiters told him.

He could pursue his love of chemistry. He could serve anywhere he chose and leave any time he wanted on an "apathy discharge" if he didn't like it. And he wouldn't have to go to Iraq if he didn't want to.

At about 3:30 in the morning, Alex was awakened in the motel and fed a little something. Twelve hours later, without further sleep or food, he had taken a battery of tests and signed a lot of papers he hadn't gotten a chance to read. "Just formalities," he was told. "Sign here. And here. Nothing to worry about."

By then Marcia had "freaked out."

She went to the Burlington recruiting center where the door was open but no one was home. So she grabbed all the cards and numbers she could find, including the address of the Seattle-area testing center.

Then, with her grown daughter in tow, she high-tailed it south, frantically phoning Axel whose cell phone had been confiscated "so he wouldn't be distracted during tests."

Axel's grandfather was in the hospital dying, she told the people at the desk. He needed to come home right away. She would have said just about anything.

But, even after being told her son would be brought right out, her daughter spied him being taken down a separate hall and into another room. So she dashed down the hall and grabbed him by the arm.

"They were telling me I needed to 'be a man' and stand up to my family," Axel said.

What he needed, it turned out, was a lawyer.

Five minutes and $250 after an attorney called the recruiters, Axel's signed papers and his cell phone were in the mail.

My request to speak with the sergeant who recruited Axel and with the Burlington office about recruitment procedures went unanswered.

And so should your phone, Marcia Cobb advised. Take your own sweet time. Keep your own counsel. And, if you see USMC on caller ID, remember what answering the call could mean.

[SirFozzie]

Here's the follow up article.

By SUSAN PAYNTER
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER COLUMNIST

More than a few proud former Marines saw the actions of a couple of zealous Marine recruiters as falling just short of trying to shanghai a Sedro-Woolley teen into the corps.

A year of relentless phone calls followed by drop-in visits, culminating in a trip to Seattle for the boy who tried to say no was the topic of Wednesday's column. The recruiters' actions tarnish this otherwise sterling branch of service, scores of them said.

"I have to wonder about the difference between refusing to go with someone and having them bully you into it until you do," Geoff Howland wrote.

"Wasn't this akin to kidnapping?" asked Don Carter and at least two dozen more who said that constantly berating a kid to "be a man" and accusing him of being "a burden" to his low-income single mom smacked of Gitmo-style "psy-ops."

It wasn't kidnapping. The kid is 18 and admittedly passive, eager to please and reluctant to argue. And he wasn't taken against his will. He just didn't know where he was going, that he'd end up in a Seattle motel room overnight. Or face a barrage of tests with little sleep or food in a center where the military seemed too daunting to resist.

With feelings about military recruiters in our high schools running hot, many, Gregory Gadow, Ted Fitch and others included, called for action against the recruiters (who did not return requests for interviews), for going beyond the call to fill their quotas.

But just as many readers went on the attack against the boy, his family and this column, charging that even questioning the recruiters' tactics is sickeningly unpatriotic.

They accused the teen, his mother, and the other relatives and friends who witnessed pieces of Axel's experience of lying. They called the boy a wimp and worse. And, without knowing anything about her, they called his mother a control freak for tracking her boy to Seattle and, with her daughter's help, springing him from the testing center.

So far, nearly 140 readers have weighed in on the odyssey of Axel, at least a dozen of them derisively evoking a mother's "apron strings."

He had to run away from his own mother to join the Marines and so did his son, wrote Michael G. Jackson, Col., USMC (retired). Who signed off with: "If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it's in English, thank a U.S. Marine."

"How come thick-skulled liberals can't comprehend that rights and liberties they enjoy owe their origin and preservation to the military?" Michael Velikin asked.

"You extreme left-wingers who hate the military should remember you are able to spread your slime because our military served to protect that right," Don Clayton wrote.

Torkel Clark, USN (retired), blamed Axel's mom, Marcia, for NOT acting sooner, the moment her then-17-year-old started getting unwanted phone calls, saying the actions of the recruiters sound like "a Moonie cult from the '70s."

And, after 12 years as a U.S. Army recruiter, Lonnie Dotson offered these tips (assuming that the teen truly does not want to join):

"Call the recruiting station commander, the recruiters' commanding officer and/or the command sergeant major and complain.

Call or write your elected official -- the military will drop everything to respond.

Fail the written test on purpose.

Fail the physical, tell the recruiters you take mind-altering drugs, or that you're a convicted felon waiting for your parole to finish.

And lastly, call a reporter."

Navy veteran Lee R. Swanson countered, "My recruiters always told me the truth." And other vets insisted that such coercion simply doesn't happen. But an equal number said they'd heard of, or experienced, similar tactics and implausible blue-sky promises.

A veteran whose son is in the Air Force, Joe Teeples tells the bitter joke about the paratrooper told by his recruiter that he'd get a bonus plus two parachutes for every jump. On the way down, as the first and the second chutes don't open, the jumper says, "That recruiter probably lied about the trucks that were going to pick us up, too!"

"I had actually been accepted to a maritime academy and had won an ROTC scholarship," the Rev. James Olson said. "But this Marine recruiter wouldn't leave me alone. ... So I told the recruiter that I was gay and he shouted a bunch of expletives at me about wasting his time and leading him on. But he did stop calling! Funny thing is, it turns out I really was gay, but hadn't figured it out at the time."

Axel's former math teacher and coach at Cascade Middle School in Sedro-Woolley, Jim Morrell, is all for supporting the military. "Our guys in Iraq are doing a job that few want to do. They deserve our unwavering support. But lawlessness is not patriotism."

He was "appalled" at what happened and disputes the notion that his former student actually wanted to join the Marines if only his mother had let him.

"Axel's nature was one of a kind, gentle kid and about the last thing I could see him doing would be joining the Marines," Morrell said.

And, finally, for those who asked, Axel is not on his way to boot camp. He's home, attending Skagit Valley Community College, and still hoping to study chemistry -- in civilian clothes.

[Schmidty]

Read this a long time ago. Crazy.

[Raiders Army]

Seattle is notorious for being anti-military, so I take this with a grain of salt.

[Schmidty]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

The entire West side of Washington is notorious for being anti-military, so I take this with a grain of salt.

Fixed it for ya.

[ShaqFu]

First off, they've done this for years. A high score on the ASVAB will really whip them into gear. Tell them you're going to college and they'll offer to pay. My trick was to tell them that I would consider it AFTER college, when I would automatically go to OCS (officer candidate school). I got a call or two from each branch, plus some mail when I got out of college. They left me alone after that.

And, after 12 years as a U.S. Army recruiter, Lonnie Dotson offered these tips (assuming that the teen truly does not want to join):

"Fail the written test on purpose.

Fail the physical, tell the recruiters you take mind-altering drugs, or that you're a convicted felon waiting for your parole to finish."

I wouldn't fail any government test on purpose, because that tests becomes part of your record. It could just as easily come back to haunt you when you went for that postal job, a job at the Secret Service, or as part of the consular team.

I did tell them I might fail the physical, because honestly I might, but they did want be to try. So that may or may not work. And, like the written test, I wouldn't do it on purpose.

Telling them you were convicted may not work either, especially for a teen. They can easily find out your background.

The drug thing might work, but like the tests, I wouldn't want anything on a Federal record that could haunt me later.

[CamEdwards]

for the Marine's side of the story, you can read this: http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...0506141217.asp

or I can just cut and paste it.

Last Friday, on NRO’s new media blog, I wrote about a column in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer by Susan Paynter that essentially accused Marine recruiters of attempting to kidnap a local 18-year-old named Axel Cobb and force him to join the Marines. The left-wing blog DailyKos had quickly picked up on the story and used it to bolster allegations that the Marines’ recruiting prospects look so dim that “They’ve resorted to kidnapping.”

The column was entirely one-sided and the story told primarily from the point of view of the 18-year-old’s mother. And there was nothing about the Marines who apparently tried to kidnap the kid.

“My request to speak with the sergeant who recruited Axel and with the Burlington office about recruitment procedures went unanswered,” Paynter wrote.

I called up the Marine recruiting office in Burlington (a suburb north of Seattle) on Thursday, and the Marine who answered the phone referred me to Sgt. John Chau, the media-affairs guy for the Seattle area. I called Chau and asked if he had spoken to Susan Paynter about the story. I was surprised by his answer:

Did I receive a call from that reporter? No. Did my Marines receive a call from that reporter? No. I can’t speculate on what she did, but I can say no query was received at this office.

I asked Sgt. Chau if it would be possible for me to speak with the Marines who recruited Axel. Sgt. Chau said he would arrange for me to speak with them on Monday. So Monday, three business days after beginning my inquiry, I spoke with Staff Sgt. Ron Marquez, the Marine who recruited Axel.


Two Different Accounts
Marquez’s account differs from Paynter’s in many key respects. Paynter tells the story of a kid bullied almost beyond endurance by sadistic Marines who drag him all over Washington State trying to disorient him and railroad him into joining the Corps. Marquez says he just saw a kid who really wanted to join the Marines but couldn’t overcome the objections of his family.

In Paynter’s version, for instance:

Marine recruiters began a relentless barrage of calls to Axel as soon as the mellow, compliant Sedro-Woolley High School grad had cut his 17th birthday cake. And soon it was nearly impossible to get the seekers of a few good men off the line.

According to Marquez:

We have systematic method of recruiting in place where we try to contact individuals who might be interested in the Marines typically when they become seniors. We looked at the call list and since the summer of 2003 when Axel became a senior, he’s been called 13 times. I contacted him on the 25th of last month [May]. Axel did not speak to anyone prior to that.

This averages to about one call every two months. For some, this might seem to be a “relentless barrage.” Eventually, despite his mother’s embargo on calls from the Marines, Axel answered the endlessly ringing phone. Even though Paynter skips past what happened next, Marquez filled in the details. After talking to Marquez on the phone, Axel visited his office for an appointment; according to Marquez:

We sat down and talked in further detail about what he wanted to do… he wanted to pursue school full-time because he was interested in chemistry. He wanted to get self-confidence and work on his leadership abilities. So I told him about my personal experience and… how he would get the opportunity to develop in those aspects. I believe we talked for two or three hours. And I asked him if he wanted to be a Marine, and then I stepped out to let him think about it, and I came back in and he said “Yeah, I wanna do this, I wanna be a Marine.” So I congratulated him, I said “You’re making a great decision”... We agreed to meet the next day.

The next day, Axel cancelled because, “His family was really against it,” Marquez said. “I asked if he would come back into my office so we could talk in person. He came back into my office. We starting talking about his goals again. Just from talking to him I knew that he wanted to join the Marine Corps.”

Marquez said his persistence in trying to recruit Axel stemmed from his conviction that Axel wanted to be a Marine — “he had been hollering ‘Yeah, I’m gonna be a Marine. This is awesome.’” Marquez thought that his family’s objections were the only thing holding him back. At their second meeting, Axel agreed to take the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery in Seattle. But then Axel told Marquez that he had another change of heart. According to Marquez:

He called up and he said, “You know, I just can’t do it. And this time his mom got on the phone and said “Our family’s not interested, don’t call here again.” I went to his house, on the weekend, so I could talk to his mom in person, with Axel there, because I knew he wanted to be a Marine.

Axel’s mother was not home. According to Paynter’s account, two Marines showed up at Axel’s house that day and started berating him. Paynter wrote that “This time, when Axel said, ‘Not interested,’ the sarge turned surly, snapping, ‘You're making a big (bleeping) mistake!’

I asked Marquez if he remembered it that way. First, he said, he was the only one who went to the house that day to see Axel. Second, he said:

I said, if the only thing that’s holding you back is your family’s objection, you have to know that these opportunities only come along once in a lifetime, and if you do let them pass, I think you’re going to be making a mistake. I didn’t yell… I can’t recall whether or not I did [use an expletive]. I don’t think so, but it’s possible. But it wasn’t a yell or a command.

The next passage in Paynter’s column is critical. In it, she all but accuses the Marines of kidnapping (even though she backed away from that characterization in her follow-up column of reader reactions). Directly following the scene at the house, Paynter wrote the following:

Next thing Axel knew, the same sergeant and another recruiter showed up at the LaConner Brewing Co., the restaurant where Axel works. And before Axel, an older cousin and other co-workers knew or understood what was happening, Axel was whisked away in a car.

“They said we were going somewhere but I didn’t know we were going all the way to Seattle,” Axel said.

Marquez said this passage is flat wrong. First, Marquez insists he was the only Marine who came to Axel’s work that night. Second, and more importantly, Marquez said that his conversation with Axel at the house ended with Axel agreeing to come to Seattle:

… his father had been in Vietnam and died early because, his mom said, of the physical weardown of being a Marine. He asked me about my family and I said I don’t have a father either, I have a stepdad, and I know back in 1998 I was a high school senior when I made the decision [to become a Marine]. My mom wasn’t too happy about it either, but once she saw that this is what I really wanted to do she was supportive.

So then we agreed, he said “I want to do this.” So I said, “I’ll pick you up after work and take you to Seattle and we can do the screenings.”

Marquez maintains that, rather than being practically abducted, Axel came along with him back to the Burlington office. Once there, Axel joined several other applicants on a trip to Seattle to register, spend the night in a hotel, then wake up early the next day and complete the mental, moral and physical screenings.

Marquez stayed behind, but that night received a phone call from Axel’s mom. The next day, Marquez went to see Axel at the testing center.

When I got to Seattle I was told that his mother and sister and a whole bunch of people were there. I saw Axel and he said he was on his way to complete the tests, and I said, “Hey, your mom said there was a family emergency,” and then I turned around and he was gone.
Here’s how Paynter described what happened next: “Five minutes and $250 after an attorney called the recruiters, Axel’s signed papers and his cell phone were in the mail.”

Marquez disputed a point of fact:

I had a couple of lawyers call that afternoon. I called back and they said, “Axel Cobb’s no longer interested in joining the Marines.” But I still had his birth certificate, his Social Security card, and his cell phone, and I said, “Is there anyway I can get these back to Axel,” and the lawyer said, “You can mail them,” and I said, “That’s unacceptable. We can’t mail these things to just anyone.” So the lawyer brought Axel up to get his stuff, and I shook his hand and gave him his stuff and told him I would be here if he ever changed his mind.


Marines say Paynter never called
Marquez told me the story of a young, impressionable boy who seemed eager to tell people what they wanted to hear. In such a situation, one could draw the conclusion that the Marines recruited Axel too aggressively. Yet, if Axel kept telling Marquez at the end of every meeting that he wanted to join the Marines, then Marquez’s job was to follow up with the kid. And over the course of the recruitment, Axel went bowling with Marquez and his wife, and he and Marquez often talked about private family issues and personal experiences. This was not the hostile, bullying relationship that Paynter’s column led readers to believe it was.

Given the number of contradictions and important nuances Paynter missed by failing to get the Marine’s side of the story, one has to wonder how strenuous an effort Paynter made to bring that story to her readers. I grew curious when Sgt. Chau told me last Friday that Paynter had never contacted him. Since then, I have been in touch with Paynter via e-mail. She responded:

Let me simply explain that, as I said, I did attempt to reach the two recruiters involved in Axel Cobb’s situation and the supervisors at the Burlington office out of which they operate. In my judgment that was the best and most direct route from which to get their version of events, rather than getting a boilerplate statement from a spokesperson further up the chain. In two days they did not respond.

I wrote to her again, asking whom she tried to contact in the Marines. She replied, “I will continue to pursue, on my own, the military side I have already attempted to obtain. But I don’t feel any obligation to provide you with names of my sources.” Thinking she misunderstood, I again asked just for the names of the Marines she tried to contact, but that e-mail has gone unanswered.

Monday, I asked Sgt. Chau, Staff Sgt. Marquez, Staff Sgt. David J. Adams (who runs the Burlington office), and Lt. Col. Robert Coty (who oversees all these Marines) if Susan Paynter had ever tried to contact any of them. All of them told me no. Staff Sgt. Adams said, “I actually had a conversation with all my Marines on this specific subject, and I asked all my Marines, ‘Has anyone been contacted by this writer?’ and no one’s been contacted in either Bellingham or Burlington.”

Because Paynter will not say who she tried to contact, I have no way of figuring out how these Marines and Susan Paynter ended up contradicting each other on this matter. I do know, however, that after going through the proper channels I was able to get a side of the story in three business days that her readers are deprived of.

Going back and reading some of Susan Paynter’s old columns, I found one she wrote this past Memorial Day: a heartfelt tribute to local families of soldiers killed in battle. It's hard to believe the same writer penned a piece so reverent to soldiers one week and one so unfair the next.

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

I've been in the military since 1999, and the Marines still call my mom's house asking about me.

[Greyroofoo]

Just wanted to brag about my ASVAB score of 99, that's all

[clintl]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

for the Marine's side of the story, [/url]

From Susan Paynter's column

My request to speak with the sergeant who recruited Axel and with the Burlington office about recruitment procedures went unanswered.

Maybe if the Marines were as interested in speaking with Ms. Paynter at the time she was researching her original column as they were when The National Review showed up for a response, their side of the story might have been told from the start. You can't blame Ms. Paynter for telling only one side if only one side would talk.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by clintl

Maybe if the Marines were as interested in speaking with Ms. Paynter at the time she was researching her original column as they were when The National Review showed up for a response, their side of the story might have been told from the start. You can't blame Ms. Paynter for telling only one side if only one side would talk.

How can you say that she attempted to contact the Marines when she refuses to say who she spoke with?

[miami_fan]

Interesting this was posted today. I recently listen to a show that talked about this.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4730222

[sovereignstar]

Originally Posted by Greyroofoo

Just wanted to brag about my ASVAB score of 99, that's all

[duckman]

Originally Posted by Greyroofoo

Just wanted to brag about my ASVAB score of 99, that's all

I was going to boast about my 91, but I see that I would not win sov's "Holy Fucking Shit" award.

[Greyroofoo]

Originally Posted by sovereignstar

wow, there's so many people to thank for this..........

[SackAttack]

Maybe this story was misrepresentation. Maybe it wasn't.

I know I'd find it a lot easier to be sympathetic to the military's point of view if they hadn't been calling me three times a week in high school, despite getting "no" as the answer every time.

When recruiters won't take "no" for an answer because they have a quota to fill, it becomes much, much easier to believe that recruiters might resort to extreme, and even illegal, measures to fill that quota.

[SackAttack]

Dola,

Anybody else terribly amused by the yahoo(s) who apparently claimed that questioning military recruitment strategies is "unpatriotic"?

I think society might be better off if somebody designed a test for common sense capabilities, and applied it to everybody on their 18th birthdays. You fail, you get a bullet in the neck.

It sounds brutal, I know, but it might encourage a nationwide phenomenon known as "think before you speak."

[Bearcat729]

Originally Posted by duckman

I was going to boast about my 91, but I see that I would not win sov's "Holy Fucking Shit" award.

I can't remember what I got overall. I know I had a 99 in science and a 6 in the auto repair section

[Greyroofoo]

I still think that all those college republicans who were so gung-ho about the war in iraq should sign up.

Heck I'm a liberal and I still signed up

[Dutch]

Recruiters suck, but their tactics are better than drawing social security numbers out of a hat.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Recruiters suck, but their tactics are better than drawing social security numbers out of a hat.

"Compelled service rocks, as long as it isn't me"?

[Poli]

Some of you may remember from John Galt's "To Tell the Truth" that I have tried to join three different branches of the military. This stems from an over zealous Marine recruiter who did a "paper physical" on me while I was a high school senior. I was disqualified, but I was never told.

This set the stage for my second disqualification. The Air Force denied me for lieing about attempting to join the military. I knew the Marine recruiter had my information, and that there was talk of a "paper physical." Still, I had never went to the MEPS station. I had not taken the ASVAB until then. Six months after my "paper physical" (where they take your paperwork and run your information through the system), I tried to join the Air Force, unaware I had been previously disqualified.

It wasn't until nearly three years later after I spent quite a bit of money on my part to clear my name that I was allowed to join the Navy.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

Some of you may remember from John Galt's "To Tell the Truth" that I have tried to join three different branches of the military. This stems from an over zealous Marine recruiter who did a "paper physical" on me while I was a high school senior. I was disqualified, but I was never told.

This set the stage for my second disqualification. The Air Force denied me for lieing about attempting to join the military. I knew the Marine recruiter had my information, and that there was talk of a "paper physical." Still, I had never went to the MEPS station. I had not taken the ASVAB until then. Six months after my "paper physical" (where they take your paperwork and run your information through the system), I tried to join the Air Force, unaware I had been previously disqualified.

It wasn't until nearly three years later after I spent quite a bit of money on my part to clear my name that I was allowed to join the Navy.

Awesome. Deny the people who want to join, frog-march the ones who don't into service. Military bureaucracy rocks!

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Awesome. Deny the people who want to join, frog-march the ones who don't into service. Military bureaucracy rocks!

That's the the thing about the bureacracy -- for all the rules and structure of the military, there are way too many loose cannons who screw it up for everybody else.

I don't think the Seattle story is typical of most recruiters, but I know it's typical of some. At my high school, you had to set yourself on fire to get the attention of the Navy and Air Force recruiters -- they were very selective and would only recruit kids who had high grades and test scores and expressed an interest. Army and Marines were different. The Army targeted kids who were in the middle of the road, while the Marines targeted primarily low-income kids. It was pretty obvious.

And I can't tell you how many kids I know who were recruited -- and this was pre Gulf War I -- by the Army and Marines and were told they would have their choice of where they were stationed and told we would never have another war.

Like I said, I don't think all military recruiters employ unethical tactics. Like just about anything else, there are bound to be bad apples that make everyone look bad.

[maxwarrior]

Why do so many of you believe the Seattle reporter's story. It's possible it is true, but it sounds like a liberal fantasy. It is very doubtful any recruiters "kidnapped" a kid. They may contact you more than you would like, but kidnapping is not recruiting tool. The article sounds more like a shot at the military than a factual account. It's popular these days to bash military recruiters.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by maxwarrior

Why do so many of you believe the Seattle reporter's story. It's possible it is true, but it sounds like a liberal fantasy. It is very doubtful any recruiters "kidnapped" a kid. They may contact you more than you would like, but kidnapping is not recruiting tool. The article sounds more like a shot at the military than a factual account. It's popular these days to bash military recruiters.

Sure. Look, I'm a huge supporter of the military. I think they do a very important job, and they deserve all the credit in the world for that, even though it's a job I wouldn't want to do.

But here's the thing. The military doesn't go after 28-33 year old men who are old enough to make a reasoned, informed decision about military service. Men who might actually understand the concept of sacrifice and have reason to be willing to offer such a sacrifice.

They go for 18-23 year old young men. Kids barely out from under their parents' wings, kids who have no concept of how the world works, kids who are, honestly, still quite impressionable. Which is why the military likes them, I understand. It's easier to shape an 18 year old into the soldier you want him to be than a 33 year old.

But the thing is, you're asking that 18 year old fresh out of high school to make a commitment to an organization that may very well ask him to die for that organization's goals. "No" should be answer enough. That kid may change his mind down the road, when he's accumulated enough experience to understand what the sacrifice really means, and he's going to be a much better soldier for you if he willingly joins up than if you harrass him into doing it.

If you harrass him into doing it - or, let's postulate for the sake of this argument that the article IS true, that a "loose cannon," if you like, shanghaied him to this center to help meet a quota - then all you're going to generate is bitterness. Bitterness from the boy down the road if he loses a limb, or an eye, or whatever, for an organization with which he wanted nothing to do in the first place.

Bitterness from the boy's parents, should the boy die for a cause he doesn't understand, all because an overzealous drill seargant taunted and harrassed him into doing something he really didn't want to do in the first place.

And, yes, bitterness from the public at-large when a story like this breaks, because they've seen tactics similar enough that, even if they've never seen a kid shanghaied that way, they have very little trouble believing it could happen.

You want to combat falling quotas? Make it easier for the people who want to join to serve their country, and stop harrassing impressionable boys and girls into joining the service to benefit your goals. If you make volunteer service feel compulsory, it won't be any wonder when the only way to bolster the armed services is through bona fide compulsory service.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

But here's the thing. The military doesn't go after 28-33 year old men who are old enough to make a reasoned, informed decision about military service. Men who might actually understand the concept of sacrifice and have reason to be willing to offer such a sacrifice.

They go for 18-23 year old young men. Kids barely out from under their parents' wings, kids who have no concept of how the world works, kids who are, honestly, still quite impressionable. Which is why the military likes them, I understand. It's easier to shape an 18 year old into the soldier you want him to be than a 33 year old.

While I agree with most of your post, I find this part funny. So the military should go after 28-33 year old men who go through Basic, AIT, Airborne, Special Forces, etc. so that in 10 years when they're an E-6 and still have to do PT with their platoon they're 38-43? Think a little bit about the physical challenges in the military. Then think about why the military would recruit 18 year olds. It's the same reason colleges don't actively recruit 28-33 year old men for football.

I went through Airborne School last November (when I turned 32) and I can tell you it was much more difficult than if I had tried to go through when I was 18.

[Raiders Army]

Dola, I also had older soldiers than the norm in my battery when I was a commander (31 year old private, 36 year old specialist, etc.). Those guys were more willing to be impressionable (i.e. don't drive and drive, etc.) than the 18 year olds, so what you're saying isn't necessarily true.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by maxwarrior

Why do so many of you believe the Seattle reporter's story. It's possible it is true, but it sounds like a liberal fantasy. It is very doubtful any recruiters "kidnapped" a kid. They may contact you more than you would like, but kidnapping is not recruiting tool. The article sounds more like a shot at the military than a factual account. It's popular these days to bash military recruiters.

I'm inclined to believe it because in about 30 minutes I can probably google up 20 or so similar stories.

As others have said, I don't think all recruiters, or even a majority act this way. And, it would appear, certainly not Air Force & Navy recruiters, who don't appear to have any problems meeting their goals. But Army & Marine recruiters? They're under a lot of pressure to meet quotas this year, and this isn't the first story I've heard about them bending the rules.

[Bee]

I tend to believe the majority of the original story based on my experience with military recruiters (although it wouldn't surprise me if there were a little embellishment involved). My senior year in high school, I was getting a couple calls every night. They'd come to the school, my house, football practice, football games, etc. I even had one come up to me when I was on a date. I kept saying no, but that didn't stop them from asking over and over and over. It didn't completely stop until my second year in college.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I'm inclined to believe it because in about 30 minutes I can probably google up 20 or so similar stories.

As others have said, I don't think all recruiters, or even a majority act this way. And, it would appear, certainly not Air Force & Navy recruiters, who don't appear to have any problems meeting their goals. But Army & Marine recruiters? They're under a lot of pressure to meet quotas this year, and this isn't the first story I've heard about them bending the rules.

Correct, it's not the majority. But it's a known issue but maybe not one that's correctable. Recruiters, afterall are just serviceman who volunteer to be recruiters. Because they claim they can get lots of people to join. Then, when they get to their recruitment centers they feel pressure to meet those quotas and deadlines (kind of like in every other thing we do in the work place).

But some of these guys are probably ex-used car salesman. For every ultra-slimy guy trying to "sell" the military, their are ultra-honest guys trying to give you the straight facts. But most are just pretty ordinary everyday people. My recruiter answered all of my questions honestly (in hindsight) for instance.

I guess what I'm trying to say is bad recruiters are as common as bad proffessors or bad policeman or bad doctors or bad lawyers or bad librarians or bad singers. Same with those who are good.

[vex]

I hate bad librarians. They once threatened to take me to a collection agency for $2.36 in late fines.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Correct, it's not the majority. But it's a known issue but maybe not one that's correctable. Recruiters, afterall are just serviceman who volunteer to be recruiters. Because they claim they can get lots of people to join. Then, when they get to their recruitment centers they feel pressure to meet those quotas and deadlines (kind of like in every other thing we do in the work place).

But some of these guys are probably ex-used car salesman. For every ultra-slimy guy trying to "sell" the military, their are ultra-honest guys trying to give you the straight facts. But most are just pretty ordinary everyday people. My recruiter answered all of my questions honestly (in hindsight) for instance.

I guess what I'm trying to say is bad recruiters are as common as bad proffessors or bad policeman or bad doctors or bad lawyers or bad librarians or bad singers. Same with those who are good.

Very honest statement, Dutch...I dont know about either on either side but I respect the candor.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by maxwarrior

Why do so many of you believe the Seattle reporter's story. It's possible it is true, but it sounds like a liberal fantasy. It is very doubtful any recruiters "kidnapped" a kid. They may contact you more than you would like, but kidnapping is not recruiting tool. The article sounds more like a shot at the military than a factual account. It's popular these days to bash military recruiters.

I'm actually not convinced Paynter's account is 100% true. However, Sgt. Marquez himself unwittingly admitted enough in his account to convince me he went way over the line. What the hell was he doing with Cobb's birth certificate, Social Security Card, and cell phone? There's not any circumstance I can think of where he should have been in possession of those items which required a lawyer to demand their return. Especially the Social Security Card and cell phone. And remember, Sgt. Marquez admitted he had them, and said he refused to return them by mail.

Also, I think it is way, way out of line for recruiters to show up at someone's place of employment seeking a meeting. You are disrupting someone's business, and you are disrupting your potential recruit's responsibilities to a third party when you do this. And Sgt. Marquez admitted he did that, too.

So, even if the Marines' account is the true one, I think they STILL come off looking like overzealous, rude, unethical creeps.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by clintl

So, even if the Marines' account is the true one, I think they STILL come off looking like overzealous, rude, unethical creeps.

I saw somebody on the TV the other day talking about recruiting levels and they brought up a good point. "All-volunteer military is a misnomer. It's really the all-recruited military."

And I agree with that. These guys have to go out and actively find recruits. It's their job, so sitting by the phone after every "Join the military" commercial plays during the baseball game isn't going to cut it.

The reality is that the noisy/rude/unethical recruiters will get all the attention (and ire) of the public because they are annoying. But the secret reality is that if these guys don't get the number of men and women to serve the US we'll still have to get people to fill those slots.

That's why I mentioned earlier that it's better to have these guys annoying you than the draft board annoying you. At least with the All-Recruited Military, you have a choice to say "No." And it looks like almost everybody here successfully thwarted the recruiters advances. And I'm proud to report from the "inside" that I have never met anybody who says they were "Shanghai'd" into the military.

I have seen many, many cases where people who probably would have spent the rest of their lives working minimum wage jobs (or worse) turn out to be very successful in their post-military lives. Lots of success stories. My lone troop right now was "recruited" off the streets of North Philly. Gansta from head to toe. He is 20 years old, too sharp for his own good, and can leave the military and work in an MIS department tommorrow (if he dresses properly for an interview that is ).

[clintl]

I agree with you that this is better than the draft, and that for some people, the military is a good choice at this stage of their lives. However, to me, that is not a good excuse for some of the things some military recruiters are doing.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by clintl

What the hell was he doing with Cobb's birth certificate, Social Security Card, and cell phone?

I gave my recruiter my Social Security card and birth certificate for processing. They put in the kit for when you go through the different processing station. I would suspect that Axel asked Sgt. Marquez to hold onto his cell phone because they are not allowed while you are going through processing.

Originally Posted by clintl

And remember, Sgt. Marquez admitted he had them, and said he refused to return them by mail.

I would suspect that they have policies stating the proper return of important documents and personal items. He wanted to make sure they were returned to the kid.

Originally Posted by clintl

Also, I think it is way, way out of line for recruiters to show up at someone's place of employment seeking a meeting. You are disrupting someone's business, and you are disrupting your potential recruit's responsibilities to a third party when you do this. And Sgt. Marquez admitted he did that, too.

No, Sgt. Marquez admitted that he was suppposed to pick Axel up after work to take him to Seattle. According to Sgt. Marquez, they had arranged the pickup at a prior meeting and that they would travel with other recruits to the MEPS station.

Originally Posted by clintl

So, even if the Marines' account is the true one, I think they STILL come off looking like overzealous, rude, unethical creeps.

How was it unethical if the kid agreed to go with him to Seattle under his own free will? I'm sorry, but 13 phone calls, two one on one meetings, and a home visit doesn't come off as overzealous either.

I have a hard time believing Ms. Paynter's story when she refuses to give us the name of the person she contacted. This is not Watergate, so I expect her to give the name of her "source". Until then, I'm going to er on the side of caution and believe Sgt. Marquez's account of events until proven otherwise.

[Dutch]

How was it unethical if the kid agreed to go with him to Seattle under his own free will? I'm sorry, but 13 phone calls, two one on one meetings, and a home visit doesn't come off as overzealous either.

That's a good point, especially when Bee said he got hundreds of phone calls his senior year.

[jaygr]

A guy tried to recruit me in Walmart once. He wasn't there for recruiting, not dressed up or anything, I guess he was just doing some shopping too. But he must have seen my green hair and thought I was some misfit who needed military direction. He just started talking to me about software (was in the software section) then suddenly asked about my future and if I wanted to join the Marines. I told him no thanks and that I was 3.8 gpa student in college, and he told me they could pay for school. I told him that would only be if I lived long enough in Iraq to finish school and then I walked away. It was a bit cliche and not exactly a zing but I was pretty put off by him trying to recruit me in freaking Walmart.

[clintl]

Actually, it is not true that Ms. Paynter refused to reveal identities of the people she tried to contact. She said she tried to contact the two recruiters (Marquez being one of them), and their supervisors. The National Review reporter then asked again a question she already answered, according to his own account, and that's when she got a little testy with him. Her first answer was more than sufficient, in my opinion.

However, I do notice that in not one single instance is there an apparent attempt by The National Review to contact the Cobbs. I can only assume that the whole purpose of their article was to discredit Paynter's article, not to find out the truth.

[MalcPow]

Originally Posted by clintl

I agree with you that this is better than the draft, and that for some people, the military is a good choice at this stage of their lives. However, to me, that is not a good excuse for some of the things some military recruiters are doing.

I think everybody agrees that any recruiters that do something like what's accused in the article shouldn't be recruiters. And I'm sure this article put anyone within a hundred yards of this kid's recruitment in the middle of a serious shitstorm, which is what should and does happen when people cross lines. It just isn't fair though when an article like this tries to universalize an obviously sensational story, and it's absolutely ludicrous for a journalist to publish something so incendiary without making contact and getting a comment from the other side (even if that comment is "no comment" you have to get something). A call to an "undisclosed source" that wasn't returned after two days is not your due diligence as a journalist before publishing something like this.

That being said we've all got stories about, or know, slimy recruiters. My senior year, after being accepted to the Naval Academy, I had a Marine recruiter try to explain to me that I should enlist because it would show the Academy that I was "really dedicated." So I tried to slow things down a bit and re-explain that I was already accepted, and he then tried to re-explain how I would be really dedicated. It really blew my mind, and I spoke with the officer who had been my contact for the Academy's application process about it. He was confused at first as well, and then basically pissed. I'm still to this day not really sure if this recruiter thought he could somehow get a freebie toward his quota since I'd be joining anyway, or if he was really trying to take advantage of and screw me just to get another spot filled. I'd be lying if I said this was somehow why I ended up going another way with school, but it definitely made me think twice about what people might be capable of.

[Arles]

I'm not as upset with Marine recruiters going hard after lower income young kids. Mostly, because I still play hoops with two guys that joined the Marines out of a very low-income area and see how they have really turned their lives around. Many young men than are in the inner cities have absolutely no chance at paying for college. To look at it from another side. Let's say 100 18-year old guys in a lower income area join the military and head off to Iraq. By the numbers, there's a very high chance that 98-100 will return back safe and sound after 4-5 years of service and have the opportunity at a college degree. Let's say those same 100 finish high school, don't go in the miliary and maybe 6-7 have the ability to pay for college. Which group of 100 will be better off? And which group of 100 will probably have more kids alive after 5-10 years?

I certainly think, as others have said, that some recruiters go over the line. But if you are recruiting in lower income areas (prominantly anti-military), they have to be somewhat aggressive or they will never get through to these kids. Again, that doesn't mean they should be able to "kidnap" recruits (which I don't think happened here). Still, I would love to see a documentary in an inner city that follows some marine recruiters over 2-3 months and documents the kids that said "Yes" and those that say "No". Then, 5-10 years later, look back on the lives of all those kids and see which group ended up fairing better. I bet it would be quite a surprise to the Michael Moore's of the world.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by MalcPow

A call to an "undisclosed source" that wasn't returned after two days is not your due diligence as a journalist before publishing something like this.

What "undisclosed source"? She pinpointed exactly who she tried to contact. Perhaps she didn't have the names, but she sure as hell gave enough information for The National Review to track them down.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Greyroofoo

Just wanted to brag about my ASVAB score of 99, that's all

I did that too. I'm wondering if everyone scores in the 99th percentile.

I'm guessing the score was too high to interest them, because they never bothered me.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by MalcPow

It just isn't fair though when an article like this tries to universalize an obviously sensational story, and it's absolutely ludicrous for a journalist to publish something so incendiary without making contact and getting a comment from the other side (even if that comment is "no comment" you have to get something).

I wish people would take this advice about a great many things in life. "Kid dies at Disney, all rides evil" or "Jerry Falwell makes stupid comment, all Christians idiots" or even "4 planes hijacked, all Arabs suspicious". Then again, I suppose there's always a delicate (read: never perfectly attainable) balance struck between generalizations and individual judgements.

SI

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Recruiters, afterall are just serviceman who volunteer to be recruiters. Because they claim they can get lots of people to join.

This is not true at all. Some volunteer, but I'd hazard to guess that a good percentage are forced into recruiting. Several of my NCOs were forced into recruiting...one of whom isn't liking what he's seeing as far as recruiting "strategies" and whatnot. Additionally, from an officer side, sometimes your branch selects you to become a recruiting commander. That was something that I was able to avoid by getting another job in the Army.

Bottom line: not all recruiters wanted to be recruiters.

[Fouts]

I can believe being bugged about joining, but I can't believe somebody being kidnapped. Sounds like an embellishment to get people to read her story. Why doesn't the mother bring charges against the recruiters?

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

Originally Posted by Fouts

I can believe being bugged about joining, but I can't believe somebody being kidnapped. Sounds like an embellishment to get people to read her story. Why doesn't the mother bring charges against the recruiters?

Because it probably didnt happen.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

This is not true at all. Some volunteer, but I'd hazard to guess that a good percentage are forced into recruiting. Several of my NCOs were forced into recruiting...one of whom isn't liking what he's seeing as far as recruiting "strategies" and whatnot. Additionally, from an officer side, sometimes your branch selects you to become a recruiting commander. That was something that I was able to avoid by getting another job in the Army.

Bottom line: not all recruiters wanted to be recruiters.

Hmmm, it's always been my perception that people look to be recruiters so they can get a stable place to live of their choosing (if available). Maybe it's my views at the Air Force that give me that perception. Or maybe it's a wrong perception. I haven't exactly looked anything up.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Hmmm, it's always been my perception that people look to be recruiters so they can get a stable place to live of their choosing (if available). Maybe it's my views at the Air Force that give me that perception. Or maybe it's a wrong perception. I haven't exactly looked anything up.

About two or thee years ago the Air Force was severely short on recruiters. Many NCOs and even a few Senior Airmen (E-4) were forced into recruiter jobs. The "benefit" of being forced into the recruiting career field was their ability to pick their area as you said if it was available. Add to that how tough the recruiting job on their careers as far as get good performance reports and I think you might find there are fewer people volunteering to be recruiters than the recruiters are finding volunteers to join the military.