Army Meets Goals

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ShadesOfGrey

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2005
1,523
0
0
BBond - I have looked at the facts as they have been presented. The facts suggest that they didn't change the goal. Your opinion, assumptions, or wishing doesn't mean they changed it. No one is arguing that recruitment is down, but there are no facts to back up the claims that they changed it for June.
Wow, I guess not only do you assume your opinions are fact, you think you suddenly know what I think about WMDs? Please PM me who will win the World Series this year since you must think you are a psychic. :roll:
 

rickn

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
7,064
0
0
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
BBond - I have looked at the facts as they have been presented. The facts suggest that they didn't change the goal. Your opinion, assumptions, or wishing doesn't mean they changed it. No one is arguing that recruitment is down, but there are no facts to back up the claims that they changed it for June.
Wow, I guess not only do you assume your opinions are fact, you think you suddenly know what I think about WMDs? Please PM me who will win the World Series this year since you must think you are a psychic. :roll:

obviously you need a dictionary. nothing they provided was a FACT, cuz in FACT none of it was true. D'OH
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Of course you're going to hit your goal if he set it low enough. That's my whole point.

Edit: Plus, this is supposed to be a big recruiting month for them.

That's what stuck out most in my mind. Why would June's recruiting numbers be the lowest in the range if that is the beginning of their busy season?
 

ShadesOfGrey

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2005
1,523
0
0
rickn - The facts laid out by the article linked suggest that there is nothing to back up the claim that they changed the numbers. They said that they didn't change June's numbers in fact. BBond and Darkhawk28 want people to believe their story despite what the article said and claim it is logic. Well, it is logic in a way, but it's just warped logic and definately not fact.
It would be interesting to know what the monthly goals for the past 3 years have been. I seem to remember reading something a while back about the Army increasing their yearly goals. If I remember correctly it went from 73K to around 80K? However none of this changes the fact that they exceeded this month's goal as has been reported.
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
rickn - The facts laid out by the article linked suggest that there is nothing to back up the claim that they changed the numbers. They said that they didn't change June's numbers in fact. BBond and Darkhawk28 want people to believe their story despite what the article said and claim it is logic. Well, it is logic in a way, but it's just warped logic and definately not fact.
It would be interesting to know what the monthly goals for the past 3 years have been. I seem to remember reading something a while back about the Army increasing their yearly goals. If I remember correctly it went from 73K to around 80K? However none of this changes the fact that they exceeded this month's goal as has been reported.

While I agree their claims that the military lowered June's goals during June are false as the article stated, IMO the logic behind a lower June number to begin with does not add up.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Heh. Reminds me of the doubled chocolate rations in Orwell's classic novel.

They didn't say that they've lowered their goals to meet their results? Had anybody expected that they would?

Stunning that such an exquisite example of Doublespeak would be advanced at all, let alone defended with such naive enthusiasm. Not surprising, however. Desperation has its own stench, detectable even over the internet.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Desperation has its own stench.

You'll enjoy this..

June 27, 2005

A Defeat Bred in Deceit
By Paul Craig Roberts

"Anyone who has proclaimed violence his method inexorably must choose lying as his principle."

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

When Bush decided, prior to September 11, to attack Iraq, he committed himself to lies and deceit. As his British co-conspirators realized, only victory could save them from the consequences.

On June 27, General George Casey, US commander of the "multinational coalition" in Iraq, told morning TV audiences that the conflict in Iraq "will not be settled on the battlefield." On June 26, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told TV audiences that "coalition forces, foreign forces are not going to repress that insurgency." The insurgency, Rumsfeld said, might "go on five, six, eight, 10, 12 years."

These admissions give the lie to Vice President Cheney?s claim that the insurgency is in "its last throes."

Would Congress have let Bush invade Iraq if Congress had known that it would not be a 3-week war but a 12-year war?

What kind of fantastic lie or gross incompetence caused a 12-year war to be marketed as a 3-week war?

How can any people, no matter how deceived and deluded, support a government capable of such miscalculation or deceit?

Would the Washington Post and the New York Times have been such willing conduits of neoconservative propaganda against Iraq if anyone on either paper had enough education to realize the catastrophe that hubris was creating? What if either paper had possessed enough of a reporter?s skepticism to ask a question?

General Casey?s and Secretary Rumsfeld?s remarks make it clear that the Defense Department has given up the prospect of military victory: The situation in Iraq, Gen. Casey said, "will ultimately be settled by negotiation and inclusion in the political process." Rumsfeld says the US troops are being killed and maimed in order to "create an environment that the Iraqi people and the Iraqi security forces can win against that insurgency."

After three years of fighting, Rumsfeld still doesn?t understand that the Iraqi people are the insurgency. Is Rumsfeld still clinging to the myth that the insurgency is an outside element injected into Iraq?

When will the moronic Bush administration realize that it is creating the environment in which the insurgency is prevailing?

Many readers write to me that Bush and his neocon crazies are Israel?s patsies. An equally good case can be made that Bush and his crazy neocons are Osama bin Laden?s agents. In a recent speech at the American University in Cairo, Egypt, Secretary of State Condi Rice repudiated America?s 60-year old policy of Middle East stability and declared: "Now, we are taking a different course."

Rice, being completely ignorant of the Middle East, believes that the path to democracy is through instability. But, of course, instability is exactly what bin Laden wants. The instability that the Bush administration is creating will unseat our puppets in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden intends to pick up the pieces.

The Bush administration has squandered America?s diplomatic, economic, and military power and is heading for defeat in Iraq, Afghanistan, and throughout the Middle East. Bush?s invasion of Iraq is fast becoming one of the greatest strategic blunders in history.

Dr. Roberts, [email him] a former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal and a former Contributing Editor of National Review, was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during the Reagan administration. He is the author of The Supply-Side Revolution and, with Lawrence M. Stratton, of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow?s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.

COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
 

Todd33

Diamond Member
Oct 16, 2003
7,842
2
81
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: Zebo
I think they should pay at least what our congress persons make. I mean the risk of getting your ass shot off, being told what to do 24/7, and sleeping on cots and eating MREs is worth at least that probably much more. But our congress critters are too tight with the money is the only reason we've had a shortfall these last couple years. Instead relying on bogus chanting of "patriot duty" for thier numbers w/o putting thier money where thier mouth is. how about they be more patriotic and how about they make a sacrifice and devote more dollars to the troops doing all the dirty work??
And yet, amazingly, people still enlist, despite not getting paid $150k+ and being well aware of the risks involved. Imagine that.


I want a draft, it would be great to have recruits from all walks of life, not just poor minorities and trailor trash.
 

AnyMal

Lifer
Nov 21, 2001
15,780
0
76
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: ahurtt
So how did they do it? Lower their quotas?

Bingo.

Now With Link

Excerpt:

Officials said Wednesday that although the Army will not release its numbers until Friday, it fell about 25 percent short of its target of signing up 6,700 recruits in May. The gap would have been even wider but for the fact that the military lowered the target by 1,350.

Here's another link


Also, don't forget that some student are just graduating high school, so this is the natural time for them to be enlisting in higher numbers. Figure this as their "holiday season" if you will. Plus the numbers they got were STILL lower than their original monthly goals.

Ummmm... Those articles have nothing to do with June recruiting goals. Nice try :roll:
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: Todd33
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: Zebo
I think they should pay at least what our congress persons make. I mean the risk of getting your ass shot off, being told what to do 24/7, and sleeping on cots and eating MREs is worth at least that probably much more. But our congress critters are too tight with the money is the only reason we've had a shortfall these last couple years. Instead relying on bogus chanting of "patriot duty" for thier numbers w/o putting thier money where thier mouth is. how about they be more patriotic and how about they make a sacrifice and devote more dollars to the troops doing all the dirty work??
And yet, amazingly, people still enlist, despite not getting paid $150k+ and being well aware of the risks involved. Imagine that.


I want a draft, it would be great to have recruits from all walks of life, not just poor minorities and trailor trash.

The draft is an anathema to human freedom and should never even be thought of.

"Of all the statist violations of individual rights in a mixed economy, the military draft is the worst. It is an abrogation of rights.

"It negates man's fundamental right?the right to life?and establishes the fundamental principle of statism: that a man's life belongs to the state, and the state may claim it by compelling him to sacrifice it in battle. Once that principle is accepted, the rest is only a matter of time."
-- AYN RAND


 

Darkhawk28

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2000
6,759
0
0
Originally posted by: AnyMal
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: ahurtt
So how did they do it? Lower their quotas?

Bingo.

Now With Link

Excerpt:

Officials said Wednesday that although the Army will not release its numbers until Friday, it fell about 25 percent short of its target of signing up 6,700 recruits in May. The gap would have been even wider but for the fact that the military lowered the target by 1,350.

Here's another link


Also, don't forget that some student are just graduating high school, so this is the natural time for them to be enlisting in higher numbers. Figure this as their "holiday season" if you will. Plus the numbers they got were STILL lower than their original monthly goals.

Ummmm... Those articles have nothing to do with June recruiting goals. Nice try :roll:

Hey Mensa, why don't you read further along in the thread.

I have 2 links that discuss May's goal and a link that discusses June's goal. Each month they lowered the goal... from 8000 (April) to 6700 (May) to 5650 (June). Those are the numbers and they are undeniable.
 

BarneyFife

Diamond Member
Aug 12, 2001
3,875
0
76
I wonder how many of those are foreign citizens who are promised US citizenship. Lets be realistic here, you have to either be 1. A complete idiot or 2. VERY DESPERATE to sign up right now.
 

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,408
57
91
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
I wonder how many of those are foreign citizens who are promised US citizenship. Lets be realistic here, you have to either be 1. A complete idiot or 2. VERY DESPERATE to sign up right now.

Yeah, no one ever signs up out of a sense of duty or patriotism or tradition or any of those 'crazy' ideas. :roll:

Jeebus - put yours and Todd33's posts together and you have our entire military force composed of poor, uneducated, desperate, idiotic trailer trash. Nice job guys! :thumbup;
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
76
A vast majority of our Army do come from poor familes and aren't well educated.

Does this mean they aren't any educated people servering in the military? No, it does not.

 

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,408
57
91
Originally posted by: Tab
A vast majority of our Army do come from poor familes and aren't well educated.

Does this mean they aren't any educated people servering in the military? No, it does not.
I am well aware of that. But:

I want a draft, it would be great to have recruits from all walks of life, not just poor minorities and trailor trash.

Maybe he meant mostly instead?

 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
76
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: Tab
A vast majority of our Army do come from poor familes and aren't well educated.

Does this mean they aren't any educated people servering in the military? No, it does not.
I am well aware of that. But:

I want a draft, it would be great to have recruits from all walks of life, not just poor minorities and trailor trash.

Maybe he meant mostly instead?

I would go that far to call them "trailor trash" are a lot of those that join the military have had rough teenage years? I wouldn't doubt it.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Yea what's up with the troop bashing.. it's aint thier fault they were subjected to a preverted foreign policy.. Most try and do a good job, and do the best they can just to survive it.. let alone have time ot understand the political nature of the conflict. I hold nothing against the troops, even the torturers who are most likly under orders and duress... need to go higher which they won't/don't.

Make no mistake though people sign up for all sorts of reasons like CK sez. My only beef is the congress critters and president. Not paying enough, not supplying enough initially, and finally putting them into a meat grinder for and offensive immoral war...
 

irwincur

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2002
1,899
0
0
Jeebus - put yours and Todd33's posts together and you have our entire military force composed of poor, uneducated, desperate, idiotic trailer trash. Nice job guys! :thumbup;

Yeah, it's pretty funny. All of the guys I know that signed up have college degrees and were willing to do it. None of them by any means were 'trailer trash'. They did it because they felt a sense of duty - can't really beat up on them for that.

Sad the the worthless libs here have no clue as to what the idiot, poor, trailer trash, morons, etc... are actually giving up - TO PROTECT YOUR WORHTLESS A$$ES.

Show some respect. Just because you are too scared to ever consider it, don't take it out on those that actually do it.
 

Darkhawk28

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2000
6,759
0
0
Originally posted by: irwincur
Jeebus - put yours and Todd33's posts together and you have our entire military force composed of poor, uneducated, desperate, idiotic trailer trash. Nice job guys! :thumbup;

Yeah, it's pretty funny. All of the guys I know that signed up have college degrees and were willing to do it. None of them by any means were 'trailer trash'. They did it because they felt a sense of duty - can't really beat up on them for that.

Sad the the worthless libs here have no clue as to what the idiot, poor, trailer trash, morons, etc... are actually giving up - TO PROTECT YOUR WORHTLESS A$$ES.

Show some respect. Just because you are too scared to ever consider it, don't take it out on those that actually do it.

So, when's your first day of Basic?
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: irwincur
Jeebus - put yours and Todd33's posts together and you have our entire military force composed of poor, uneducated, desperate, idiotic trailer trash. Nice job guys! :thumbup;

Yeah, it's pretty funny. All of the guys I know that signed up have college degrees and were willing to do it. None of them by any means were 'trailer trash'. They did it because they felt a sense of duty - can't really beat up on them for that.

Sad the the worthless libs here have no clue as to what the idiot, poor, trailer trash, morons, etc... are actually giving up - TO PROTECT YOUR WORHTLESS A$$ES.

Show some respect. Just because you are too scared to ever consider it, don't take it out on those that actually do it.

:cookie: to stick up that a$$ that does your talking for you.
 

ahurtt

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2001
4,283
0
0
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
So being that the Army has lowered their recruiting goals, that must mean things are going much better in the ME than has been reported since we now (sponteneously) require less troops then has been forcasted for months/years. EIther that or this is just some sort of propoganda designed to asuage the negative image that has befallen the "war" and stiffled recruiting efforts...

It must mean things are going much better. . .I mean c'mon. . .the insurgency is in it "last throes."
 

ahurtt

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2001
4,283
0
0
Originally posted by: Todd33
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: Zebo
I think they should pay at least what our congress persons make. I mean the risk of getting your ass shot off, being told what to do 24/7, and sleeping on cots and eating MREs is worth at least that probably much more. But our congress critters are too tight with the money is the only reason we've had a shortfall these last couple years. Instead relying on bogus chanting of "patriot duty" for thier numbers w/o putting thier money where thier mouth is. how about they be more patriotic and how about they make a sacrifice and devote more dollars to the troops doing all the dirty work??
And yet, amazingly, people still enlist, despite not getting paid $150k+ and being well aware of the risks involved. Imagine that.


I want a draft, it would be great to have recruits from all walks of life, not just poor minorities and trailor trash.

I think you have the notion that it would be impossible for the draft process to be biased and influenced by money. At least now the poor minorities still have a choice about whether or not they want to sign up. With a draft, they would be forced and the more well-off people would be able to buy their way out somehow. There's always a loophole, especially when you have some money. Money is very good at creating loopholes.
 

irwincur

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2002
1,899
0
0
So, when's your first day of Basic?

It's not about that. It is about respecting and appreciative of those that did join.

Some people here are too worthless to even give them the credit that they deserve. And as usual spout off with some random stupidity.