Columbia student writes about ROTC

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
"So basically, if you want to get extra money to go to school, you have to learn how to kill people. Even if this does increase the amount of diversity here, this is not how the diversity should be created, with white students being doctors and lawyers, and blacks and Latinos being soldiers." :thumbsup:

He doesn't want the local low-income kids suckered into becoming cannon-fodder.
What is the problem with this? The ROTC targets these kids on purpose. Hope they keep ROTC out for another 30 years.
They want recruits there are plenty of well-off republican kids excited about this war. Send them.

I'm in ROTC. I'm not on scholarship. In fact, only about 30% of the people in ROTC, at least at my school, are actually on Scholarship. I pay for my school with school loans, like most everyone else.

I joined because I wanted to join up. And you have a misconception about who we are "targeting." We recruit anyone who is interested. Everyone is a potential "target." Of course, we have standards and skill sets we are looking for in particular, so not everyone makes the cut. But anyone is welcome to take a class and try it out, to see if they like it. No obligation. It isn't like we are going around campus all the time trying to sucker people in to signing up.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Bottom line is, ROTC would not be accepted by Columbia students, for the tolerance issue alone.

Liberal academic intellectual tolerance at its best! If they want that "freedom" from ROTC, then they can also have freedom from Pell grants and Stafford, PLUS or Perkins loans. No government economic tyranny for them! Maybe MoveOn.org can set up a scholarship fund.

They aren't complaining about anything economic related. It's simply intolerance in the military. If Bush wants to tie federal funding to the ROTC, he can do his best to try.

Obviously they aren't complaining about anything economic related, but the fact of the matter is one of the foremost responsibilities of the federal government is defense of the nation. If the students of Columbia don't see fit to assist that facet of the government (or even allow it to function through ROTC), why should they receive the benefit of FEDERAL loans? Ask your state government, Sen. Clinton, MoveOn.org, or CNN, but don't go crying to the federal government. Or go to a cheaper school that actually practices tolerance for views other than liberal.

 

[Starbuck1975]

There are very few, if any, college students who join ROTC for the sole reason of helping to pay for their education...given that we are currently a nation at war, I don't see how anyone could go into ROTC without an expectation of deploying into a combat zone...not something many students who want a free ride would be willing to risk.

As for this article's assertation that ROTC targets minorities, that is a blatant lie, as the majority of officers are white...he can make this case against enlisted recruiting for inner cities, but a little bit harder for ROTC programs on college campuses.

I know it is hard for some of the people on this forum to believe, but some people actually find military service to be desireable...and it is not like anyone who joins the military does not derive a benefit from it...military leadership skills tend to be highly marketable in the business world...now why is that I wonder if all soldiers are simply mindless drones killing in the name of W???

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Bottom line is, ROTC would not be accepted by Columbia students, for the tolerance issue alone.

Liberal academic intellectual tolerance at its best! If they want that "freedom" from ROTC, then they can also have freedom from Pell grants and Stafford, PLUS or Perkins loans. No government economic tyranny for them! Maybe MoveOn.org can set up a scholarship fund.

They aren't complaining about anything economic related. It's simply intolerance in the military. If Bush wants to tie federal funding to the ROTC, he can do his best to try.

Obviously they aren't complaining about anything economic related, but the fact of the matter is one of the foremost responsibilities of the federal government is defense of the nation. If the students of Columbia don't see fit to assist that facet of the government (or even allow it to function through ROTC), why should they receive the benefit of FEDERAL loans? Ask your state government, Sen. Clinton, MoveOn.org, or CNN, but don't go crying to the federal government. Or go to a cheaper school that actually practices tolerance for views other than liberal.

Why? Because they are educating young Americans to be future thinkers and leaders that will help our country a great deal in the long run. Some of the brightest people in the country go to Columbia, and the Federal Government will benefit hugely by their education. And there are other ways to protect the security of our nation than the military: diplomacy (which is what many Columbians will be doing), defense research and development, politics, etc.... Part of leadership is standing up for your principles, and that is exactly what Columbia students are doing; they view the military policies as unjust, and they shouldn't be obliged to support it. Whether they receive federal funds or not is irrelevent, especially when those funds are meant to educate the future smart people. At this stage in their life, IMO, they should be taught to stand up for what they believe in. These students especially should not be forced to endorse what they view as unjust so they can get educational loans from the federal government. They are not practicing intolerance per se, they are practicing intolerance for intolerance in the military.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Bottom line is, ROTC would not be accepted by Columbia students, for the tolerance issue alone.

Liberal academic intellectual tolerance at its best! If they want that "freedom" from ROTC, then they can also have freedom from Pell grants and Stafford, PLUS or Perkins loans. No government economic tyranny for them! Maybe MoveOn.org can set up a scholarship fund.

They aren't complaining about anything economic related. It's simply intolerance in the military. If Bush wants to tie federal funding to the ROTC, he can do his best to try.

Obviously they aren't complaining about anything economic related, but the fact of the matter is one of the foremost responsibilities of the federal government is defense of the nation. If the students of Columbia don't see fit to assist that facet of the government (or even allow it to function through ROTC), why should they receive the benefit of FEDERAL loans? Ask your state government, Sen. Clinton, MoveOn.org, or CNN, but don't go crying to the federal government. Or go to a cheaper school that actually practices tolerance for views other than liberal.

Why? Because they are educating young Americans to be future thinkers and leaders that will help our country a great deal in the long run. Some of the brightest people in the country go to Columbia, and the Federal Government will benefit hugely by their education. And there are other ways to protect the security of our nation than the military: diplomacy (which is what many Columbians will be doing), defense research and development, politics, etc.... Part of leadership is standing up for your principles, and that is exactly what Columbia students are doing; they view the military policies as unjust, and they shouldn't be obliged to support it. Whether they receive federal funds or not is irrelevent, especially when those funds are meant to educate the future smart people. At this stage in their life, IMO, they should be taught to stand up for what they believe in. These students especially should not be forced to endorse what they view as unjust so they can get educational loans from the federal government. They are not practicing intolerance per se, they are practicing intolerance for intolerance in the military.

They should be taught to stand up for what they believe, but in a manner that is respectful for those that are willing to join the armed forces. Look, I don't support the war in Iraq, but I feel this article is digging more at the people who join in the military than what the military is doing.

The guy who wrote this article basically sounds like a rich, snobby, prick.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Bottom line is, ROTC would not be accepted by Columbia students, for the tolerance issue alone.

Liberal academic intellectual tolerance at its best! If they want that "freedom" from ROTC, then they can also have freedom from Pell grants and Stafford, PLUS or Perkins loans. No government economic tyranny for them! Maybe MoveOn.org can set up a scholarship fund.

They aren't complaining about anything economic related. It's simply intolerance in the military. If Bush wants to tie federal funding to the ROTC, he can do his best to try.

Obviously they aren't complaining about anything economic related, but the fact of the matter is one of the foremost responsibilities of the federal government is defense of the nation. If the students of Columbia don't see fit to assist that facet of the government (or even allow it to function through ROTC), why should they receive the benefit of FEDERAL loans? Ask your state government, Sen. Clinton, MoveOn.org, or CNN, but don't go crying to the federal government. Or go to a cheaper school that actually practices tolerance for views other than liberal.

Why? Because they are educating young Americans to be future thinkers and leaders that will help our country a great deal in the long run. Some of the brightest people in the country go to Columbia, and the Federal Government will benefit hugely by their education. And there are other ways to protect the security of our nation than the military: diplomacy (which is what many Columbians will be doing), defense research and development, politics, etc.... Part of leadership is standing up for your principles, and that is exactly what Columbia students are doing; they view the military policies as unjust, and they shouldn't be obliged to support it. Whether they receive federal funds or not is irrelevent, especially when those funds are meant to educate the future smart people. At this stage in their life, IMO, they should be taught to stand up for what they believe in. These students especially should not be forced to endorse what they view as unjust so they can get educational loans from the federal government. They are not practicing intolerance per se, they are practicing intolerance for intolerance in the military.

They should be taught to stand up for what they believe, but in a manner that is respectful for those that are willing to join the armed forces. Look, I don't support the war in Iraq, but I feel this article is digging more at the people who join in the military than what the military is doing.

The guy who wrote this article basically sounds like a rich, snobby, prick.

Sure, parts of the article I don't agree with (look earlier in this thread). The kid comes across as arrogant (but I think part of what he was trying to do is be incendiary, to evoke a response from Bollinger). But to the question of whether the students should allow ROTC on the campus, I agree with him - absolutely not. Columbia students can still join ROTC programs at other colleges in New York if they really want to (and still remain Columbia students).

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Bottom line is, ROTC would not be accepted by Columbia students, for the tolerance issue alone.

Liberal academic intellectual tolerance at its best! If they want that "freedom" from ROTC, then they can also have freedom from Pell grants and Stafford, PLUS or Perkins loans. No government economic tyranny for them! Maybe MoveOn.org can set up a scholarship fund.

They aren't complaining about anything economic related. It's simply intolerance in the military. If Bush wants to tie federal funding to the ROTC, he can do his best to try.

Obviously they aren't complaining about anything economic related, but the fact of the matter is one of the foremost responsibilities of the federal government is defense of the nation. If the students of Columbia don't see fit to assist that facet of the government (or even allow it to function through ROTC), why should they receive the benefit of FEDERAL loans? Ask your state government, Sen. Clinton, MoveOn.org, or CNN, but don't go crying to the federal government. Or go to a cheaper school that actually practices tolerance for views other than liberal.

Why? Because they are educating young Americans to be future thinkers and leaders that will help our country a great deal in the long run. Some of the brightest people in the country go to Columbia, and the Federal Government will benefit hugely by their education. And there are other ways to protect the security of our nation than the military: diplomacy (which is what many Columbians will be doing), defense research and development, politics, etc.... Part of leadership is standing up for your principles, and that is exactly what Columbia students are doing; they view the military policies as unjust, and they shouldn't be obliged to support it. Whether they receive federal funds or not is irrelevent, especially when those funds are meant to educate the future smart people. At this stage in their life, IMO, they should be taught to stand up for what they believe in. These students especially should not be forced to endorse what they view as unjust so they can get educational loans from the federal government. They are not practicing intolerance per se, they are practicing intolerance for intolerance in the military.

They should be taught to stand up for what they believe, but in a manner that is respectful for those that are willing to join the armed forces. Look, I don't support the war in Iraq, but I feel this article is digging more at the people who join in the military than what the military is doing.

The guy who wrote this article basically sounds like a rich, snobby, prick.

Sure, parts of the article I don't agree with (look earlier in this thread). The kid comes across as arrogant (but I think part of what he was trying to do is be incendiary, to evoke a response from Bollinger). But to the question of whether the students should allow ROTC on the campus, I agree with him - absolutely not. Columbia students can still join ROTC programs at other colleges in New York if they really want to (and still remain Columbia students).

Of course you are correct, and the article IS only about a college campus and an issue on that campus. Sorry, the whole bothered me when I read it because one of my good friends is about to graduate annapolis and will probably be deployed.

 

[motard]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: dannybek

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
"So basically, if you want to get extra money to go to school, you have to learn how to kill people. Even if this does increase the amount of diversity here, this is not how the diversity should be created, with white students being doctors and lawyers, and blacks and Latinos being soldiers." :thumbsup:

He doesn't want the local low-income kids suckered into becoming cannon-fodder.
What is the problem with this? The ROTC targets these kids on purpose. Hope they keep ROTC out for another 30 years.
They want recruits there are plenty of well-off republican kids excited about this war. Send them.

1. "He doesn't want the local low-income kids suckered into becoming cannon-fodder."

Statistics show that local low income kids do not attend Columbia University. The kids you talk about which are from Harlem, Washington Heights, et cetera go to colleges and universities that are drastically cheaper in tuition than CU.

2. "The ROTC targets these kids on purpose."
Reserve Officer Training Corps do not recruit of target kids. In fact the opposite is true. College and University students come to ROTC to gain experience. There is no obligation to serve in the military in ROTC without a commitment.

3. "Hope they keep ROTC out for another 30 years. They want recruits there are plenty of well-off republican kids excited about this war. Send them."

THERE ARE THOSE WHO HAVE SWEATED THEIR ASSES OFF IN JUNGLES, BEING SHOT AT FOR THIS NATION. WHAT IN THE HELL HAVE YOU DONE, YOU LITTLE SH*T SUCKING WEASEL? WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU PUT YOUR ASS ON THE LINE FOR ANYTHING? AND YET YOU HAVE THE UNMITIGATED TEMERITY TO SHOW UP HERE AND MOCK AND REDICULE OUR NATION AND MILITARY. I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ANOTHER WORD OUT OF THAT COMMIE CRYHOLE IN THAT SH*TPILE YOU CALL A HEAD! IN FACT GET THE F*CK OUT OF THE USA A*SHOLE!

Uh huh when was the last time you took your medication and looked at the world through something besides a GI Joe/Fox news orgy? *hands over towel for frothing mouth.*
You sir know nothing about freedom and what this country means. Try joining a militia if you think the commies are coming.
*Proud former member of US armed services and proud outspoken American at what I feel is wrong, don't like it move to communist china -it would fit your mindset better.*
Oh yeah XYZ dude your e-penis is sticking out "tough guy". (see sig)

It is obvious you must resort to attacking the messenger not the message, you are a cliché.
Nothing but sh*t comes out of your mouth. Your views and response are not dialectical and obviously you come off as a whiny crackpot.

Proud former member of US armed services

I cannot believe you lie to protect your claim to bad mouthing your country and say what you said above.