College students have long begrudged that an 18-year-old can fight and die for the country but not purchase a beer.
Newly released statistics demonstrate that UCLA students are among the lucky ones ““ an 18-year-old can fight and die for the country without finishing high school.
Less than a week ago, Time magazine published a story revealing a disturbing trend in recent army recruiting tactics.
The article, titled “Army Recruiting More Dropouts” (Jan. 23), cites a National Priorities Project report that analyzed the army’s most recent recruiting push.
That the army is recruiting high school dropouts at alarming rates highlights two main facets of the American sentiment: that the army is desperate for recruits and resorting to unethical tactics targeting those with little education (and poor socioeconomic standing), and that affluent, educated Americans do not believe today’s wars are wars their children should fight.
The report is especially pertinent given that Los Angeles ranked third on the report’s list of cities ranked by raw number of recruits enlisted, with 917 in 2007.
According to the National Priorities Project report, the army is not only continuing to target the uneducated, but also the fiscally despondent.
The most productive recruiting done is that on the fiscal group of family incomes of $45,000 to $50,000.
The ratio of active-duty army recruits in the 18 to 24-year-old population in this group is more than tenfold that of families with incomes of $145,000 to $154,499.
The report also shows a steep, continuous drop in recruits as income rises.
As the Time article puts it, “Recruits from families with annual incomes below $60,000 are over-represented in uniform … while those from families earning more are under-represented.”
This dynamic connotes that the army is taking those who may have no choice ““ no access to education, bleak chances at a stable career, and the lack of knowledge of any opportunities available to them.
It also shows that the affluent are clearly more hesitant to enlist than to politically condone wars.
It has always been easy to support a war if your children will be safe at home each night.
Further evidence of the military’s current problems is readily available.
An MSNBC.com article exposed the military as one of five groups of “STD Super-Spreaders,” in the company of convicts, ex-convicts and intravenous drug users.
The report estimated that 2.5 percent of all female soldiers on active duty in Iraq have been infected with a sexually transmitted disease, and that viral infections are more common in the military than bacterial ones.
While correlation has not been reported, it seems likely that uneducated and lower-income recruits would fall prey to sexually transmitted diseases, given that lower-income and low education areas in the states themselves suffer from a similar trend.
According to a 2006 Centers for Disease Control study on STD’s, racial and ethnic minorities (among the poorest of Americans) were afflicted by “contributing factors includ(ing) limited access to quality health care, poverty.”
Moral implications aside, it is not even in the best interest of the army to recruit what they themselves label “Low Quality Recruits.” According to a Department of Defense report cited by the National Priorities Project, a high school diploma “is the single best predictor of successful completion of a first term of enlistment.”
So when high school dropouts enlist, the army risks spending massive amounts of money (each successful recruiting attempt costs thousands of dollars) on recruits that are less likely to complete their tours.
The conundrum is admittedly a highly complex one.
The facts are that America is fighting wars, that the army is failing to meet its army benchmarks, and that “high quality” recruits are scarce.
However, attacking these problems by compromising moral and civil responsibilities is hardly the solution.
Instead of continuing to prey on those with little education or fiscal access, the army should face the truth: the American public is not willing to fight wars they do not believe in.
Until policy changes, recruiting numbers will not rise.
Wealthy politicians will continue to speak of supporting the troops while shielding their own children from the firefight.
Army recruiters will swarm upon low-income areas.
Our nation’s uneducated and low-income young men and women will risk their lives for wars the rest of us choose not to fight ““ because we can.
Disgusted by army recruiting tactics targeting the poor and uneducated? E-mail Makarechi at kmakarechi@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.