Originally posted by: BBond
Mr. Recruiter, I dare you to call and recruit the Bush twins.
WHITE HOUSE:
Tel: 202-456-1414
Fax: 202-456-2461
BBond... i think you and i both know they are too snobby, to elitest, and to religious to join the military
Originally posted by: BBond
Mr. Recruiter, I dare you to call and recruit the Bush twins.
WHITE HOUSE:
Tel: 202-456-1414
Fax: 202-456-2461
Originally posted by: tss4
Sweet retirement. Good deal when you can move onto a new job after that. Plus you get all the military benefits like the VA hospital, right?
Originally posted by: Deptacon
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Deptacon
well, im getting paid "really, really, good money" to go over there, and i can underatnd why they pay so much becuase of the condtion over there, but i understand fully what to company is doing over there from my interviews and talking with comany officals, pretty much supply logistal and security jobs for the military so they dont have to use personael of thier won to do those jobs.....
of course they are profiting, since when does a compnay exist not to make a profit....unless its in a communist country, but thats what you reallt want right?
BS
"If you think this war will bring any financial(oil) gain to the USA, you have a few screws loose."
Is there financial gain in Iraq?
Yep.
I hope you actually have to do the work Halliburton bills us for.![]()
im gonna.... 14-16 hrs a day, 7 days a week, for 1 yr.... Logistical Section Manager 175,000 bucks for one yr.... not taxed
Originally posted by: Tylanner
If you think this war will bring any financial(oil) gain to the USA, you have a few screws loose.
Iraq is not an imperial undertaking....
Originally posted by: Deptacon
Originally posted by: BBond
Mr. Recruiter, I dare you to call and recruit the Bush twins.
WHITE HOUSE:
Tel: 202-456-1414
Fax: 202-456-2461
BBond... i think you and i both know they are too snobby, to elitest, and to religious to join the military
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: Tylanner
If you think this war will bring any financial(oil) gain to the USA, you have a few screws loose.
Iraq is not an imperial undertaking....
Certainly it will bring financial gain to the wealthiest segments of society. And bankrupting the US treasury is a way for Bush to destroy social security once & for all, which will in turn provide further opportunities for that wealthiest 1% of society to get their hands on an even greater portion of your nation's wealth. So sad.
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Liberals support 13 year olds having abortions without parental notification, yet they want to pass legislation that would prevent military recruiters from contacting students unless their parents "opt-in".
Typical nonsense and hypocrisy from the left.
Link
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Since parental consent is required to enlist, why can't recruiters at least talk to them?
Well, I'm about as liberal as they come, and I think recruiters should be able to at least speak with high school kids without parents having to give approval.
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Deptacon
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Deptacon
well, im getting paid "really, really, good money" to go over there, and i can underatnd why they pay so much becuase of the condtion over there, but i understand fully what to company is doing over there from my interviews and talking with comany officals, pretty much supply logistal and security jobs for the military so they dont have to use personael of thier won to do those jobs.....
of course they are profiting, since when does a compnay exist not to make a profit....unless its in a communist country, but thats what you reallt want right?
BS
"If you think this war will bring any financial(oil) gain to the USA, you have a few screws loose."
Is there financial gain in Iraq?
Yep.
I hope you actually have to do the work Halliburton bills us for.![]()
im gonna.... 14-16 hrs a day, 7 days a week, for 1 yr.... Logistical Section Manager 175,000 bucks for one yr.... not taxed
I would have asked for triple that for those hours in Iraq.
Halliburton can well afford it. They have plenty of extra cash around from *unfinished* projects.![]()
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Liberals support 13 year olds having abortions without parental notification, yet they want to pass legislation that would prevent military recruiters from contacting students unless their parents "opt-in".
Typical nonsense and hypocrisy from the left.
Link
Under a provision of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Law, high schools across the country are required to supply military recruiters with the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of their students. Schools that resist this mandate face penalties that include loss of all federal educational funding.
============================
Son of a biatch. You call this Hypocracy??? :roll:
I call it Hitler Part II U.S. Republican style :|
The more I see what is buried in all of the falsely named Republican Acts, the madder I get.
Viva U.S. Revolutionary War II
Originally posted by: Deptacon
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Liberals support 13 year olds having abortions without parental notification, yet they want to pass legislation that would prevent military recruiters from contacting students unless their parents "opt-in".
Typical nonsense and hypocrisy from the left.
Link
The USA is one of the few first world countries that actively solicits children for military service. Making children (people under the age of 18, or possibly 21) into soldiers ("child soldiers") is actually a violation of international law.
no its not, its completly voulntary,
Originally posted by: Deptacon
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Deptacon
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Deptacon
well, im getting paid "really, really, good money" to go over there, and i can underatnd why they pay so much becuase of the condtion over there, but i understand fully what to company is doing over there from my interviews and talking with comany officals, pretty much supply logistal and security jobs for the military so they dont have to use personael of thier won to do those jobs.....
of course they are profiting, since when does a compnay exist not to make a profit....unless its in a communist country, but thats what you reallt want right?
BS
"If you think this war will bring any financial(oil) gain to the USA, you have a few screws loose."
Is there financial gain in Iraq?
Yep.
I hope you actually have to do the work Halliburton bills us for.![]()
im gonna.... 14-16 hrs a day, 7 days a week, for 1 yr.... Logistical Section Manager 175,000 bucks for one yr.... not taxed
I would have asked for triple that for those hours in Iraq.
Halliburton can well afford it. They have plenty of extra cash around from *unfinished* projects.![]()
well it can easily changed, promotions are fast paced over there, and if you sign up for an xtra yr after completting your first contracted yr, it goes to 250,000 plus becuase you already have experiance in theater....
i wil lsee how it is, im doing it cause im about to finish college, and im not going fulltime army, just part time ( no such thing really noa days, but i still need a job) and i wanna get a good financvial foot for the rest of my life, and most job offers i have recieved are around 40,000, so id like to go for the bigger cheese...
plsu id like tosee how things are first hand over there, too much propoganda etc..... its a good resume booster working as a contractor over there as well...so...im willing to do it, its not for everyone
Please tell me you understand the differences between the Federal Government and private citizens/coorporations. Maybe you also think that Pepsi should be able to levi taxes on you? :roll: Let's put away the box of fallacies for this one, Mmkay?Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Since parental consent is required to enlist, why can't recruiters at least talk to them?
Well, I'm about as liberal as they come, and I think recruiters should be able to at least speak with high school kids without parents having to give approval.
Should homosexuals be able to at least speak to high school students (providing information & support to kids questioning their sexual orientation, or being involved in anti-bullying programs) without parents having to give approval?
Should Pepsi, McDonald's, etc., be allowed to advertise their products on school grounds?
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: Deptacon
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Liberals support 13 year olds having abortions without parental notification, yet they want to pass legislation that would prevent military recruiters from contacting students unless their parents "opt-in".
Typical nonsense and hypocrisy from the left.
Link
The USA is one of the few first world countries that actively solicits children for military service. Making children (people under the age of 18, or possibly 21) into soldiers ("child soldiers") is actually a violation of international law.
no its not, its completly voulntary,
It is almost universally recognized that children under the age of 18 are not fully capable of giving informed consent due to their immaturity in decision making. Governments actively recruiting children into the military is a moral outrage.
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Liberals support 13 year olds having abortions without parental notification, yet they want to pass legislation that would prevent military recruiters from contacting students unless their parents "opt-in".
Typical nonsense and hypocrisy from the left.
Link
Under a provision of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Law, high schools across the country are required to supply military recruiters with the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of their students. Schools that resist this mandate face penalties that include loss of all federal educational funding.
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Please tell me you understand the differences between the Federal Government and private citizens/coorporations. Maybe you also think that Pepsi should be able to levi taxes on you? :roll: Let's put away the box of fallacies for this one, Mmkay?Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Since parental consent is required to enlist, why can't recruiters at least talk to them?
Well, I'm about as liberal as they come, and I think recruiters should be able to at least speak with high school kids without parents having to give approval.
Should homosexuals be able to at least speak to high school students (providing information & support to kids questioning their sexual orientation, or being involved in anti-bullying programs) without parents having to give approval?
Should Pepsi, McDonald's, etc., be allowed to advertise their products on school grounds?
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Please tell me you understand the differences between the Federal Government and private citizens/coorporations. Maybe you also think that Pepsi should be able to levi taxes on you? :roll: Let's put away the box of fallacies for this one, Mmkay?Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Since parental consent is required to enlist, why can't recruiters at least talk to them?
Well, I'm about as liberal as they come, and I think recruiters should be able to at least speak with high school kids without parents having to give approval.
Should homosexuals be able to at least speak to high school students (providing information & support to kids questioning their sexual orientation, or being involved in anti-bullying programs) without parents having to give approval?
Should Pepsi, McDonald's, etc., be allowed to advertise their products on school grounds?
I don't understand your point. Please elaborate.
I don't find your distinction between government and private organisations to be relevant from a moral perspective. With both the armed services, and fast food companies, you have entities which are pitching their product to a captive audience of school children. In both cases, the product is potentially harmful to the health of those children (death on the battle field, or detrimental health effects from unhealthy foods.)
Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
Deptacon
Are your oral communication skills as poor as your written ones? This is the result of a college education? You hope to hold a managerial position with such attenuated skills? You fly off the handle and resort to name calling when talking to those with differing opinions? Good luck in the real world.
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
You libs need to make up your minds. Do you want someone's "morals" forced upon us or not? I am talking about from a legal standpoint - leave your morals out of it.
Army recruiters visting schools to "pitch" their ideas of the Armed Forces is the legal equivalent of Congressmen visting schools "pitching" their ideas of how a bill becomes a law, or the President "pitching" his ideas on "voting."
I'm truly sorry you think that private entities should be just as allowed to "pitch" thier products/services to our children, from a "moral" perspective.
Originally posted by: piasabird
I dont think students should be forced to go and listen to some recruiter. I imagine the military recruiter shows up at a scheduled assembly and then the students are forced to listen to the recruiter, without no one else giving an opposing view point. I think this is totally wrong.
However, I think if the recruiter wanted to put up a poster or show up on career day or something like that, then that would be all right. I dont even see anything wrong if the recruiter wants to show up one day during the week and announce he is there to talk to anyone who is considering the armed forces. Just do not force students to watch or listen to them if they dont want to.
One thing I dont agree with is giving a list of all the students or their phone numbers. I know this is going on in some instances.
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Liberals support 13 year olds having abortions without parental notification, yet they want to pass legislation that would prevent military recruiters from contacting students unless their parents "opt-in".
Typical nonsense and hypocrisy from the left.
Link
Under a provision of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Law, high schools across the country are required to supply military recruiters with the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of their students. Schools that resist this mandate face penalties that include loss of all federal educational funding.
:shocked: Damn. I didn't know that. What a crock.
Personally, I hated dealing with the recruiters in High School. We were required (I assume?) to take that ASFAB test or whatever our senior year. I apparently scored remarkably well (maybe they just say that to everyone), as I had recruiters ringing me several times a day, and even pulling me out of class to "go over some paperwork." I finally just told them that I wasn't interested and already had college scholarships and that was it.
Pushy bastards - and I can see how some more weak-willed students could fall right in. But then again, when you are talking about children, it all comes back to parents and their responsibilites.
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Please tell me you understand the differences between the Federal Government and private citizens/coorporations. Maybe you also think that Pepsi should be able to levi taxes on you? :roll: Let's put away the box of fallacies for this one, Mmkay?Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Since parental consent is required to enlist, why can't recruiters at least talk to them?
Well, I'm about as liberal as they come, and I think recruiters should be able to at least speak with high school kids without parents having to give approval.
Should homosexuals be able to at least speak to high school students (providing information & support to kids questioning their sexual orientation, or being involved in anti-bullying programs) without parents having to give approval?
Should Pepsi, McDonald's, etc., be allowed to advertise their products on school grounds?
I don't understand your point. Please elaborate.
I don't find your distinction between government and private organisations to be relevant from a moral perspective. With both the armed services, and fast food companies, you have entities which are pitching their product to a captive audience of school children. In both cases, the product is potentially harmful to the health of those children (death on the battle field, or detrimental health effects from unhealthy foods.)
You libs need to make up your minds. Do you want someone's "morals" forced upon us or not?
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
I am talking about from a legal standpoint - leave your morals out of it.
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Army recruiters visting schools to "pitch" their ideas of the Armed Forces is the legal equivalent of Congressmen visting schools "pitching" their ideas of how a bill becomes a law, or the President "pitching" his ideas on "voting."
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
I'm truly sorry you think that private entities should be just as allowed to "pitch" thier products/services to our children, from a "moral" perspective.
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: Deptacon
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Liberals support 13 year olds having abortions without parental notification, yet they want to pass legislation that would prevent military recruiters from contacting students unless their parents "opt-in".
Typical nonsense and hypocrisy from the left.
Link
The USA is one of the few first world countries that actively solicits children for military service. Making children (people under the age of 18, or possibly 21) into soldiers ("child soldiers") is actually a violation of international law.
no its not, its completly voulntary,
It is almost universally recognized that children under the age of 18 are not fully capable of giving informed consent due to their immaturity in decision making. Governments actively recruiting children into the military is a moral outrage.
