11/6 US Army recruiters lie to get people to enlist:
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2626032&page=1
\_ This is news how exactly? I was looking for info on ROTC while
applying for college, and made the mistake of asking at a
recruiting station (long since closed, fuckers) about how one goes
about becoming an officer. The shit they put me through and told
me was absolutely amazing. -John
\_ So you didn't join the Waffen-SS after all?
\- i think the news or rather the "new" part is the country
is at war now. it's one thing to BS about benefits and
such, it seems another to lie to a direct question "will
i end up in iraq". and it is sad we dont consider it
"news" that mlitary recruiters are the same species as
gym salesmen and cell phone vendors. the real or the
"big" issues here is obvious, so i wont belabor it.
\_ It surprises me that you feel there is a difference. The
tactics they use to get people to sign up are very low, and
I can see how someone without much education would fall for
it easiily. I recall the same shit during Iraq #1, but
nobody made as much of a stink over it because not as many
people were dying. They are salesmen, they have a quota to
meet, and the company's in trouble. Quotas just got upped.
I don't differentiate between lying to get people into an
organization whose nature it is that you might get killed,
whether people are actually dying or not. -John
\- well i dont think there is a bright line about what
falls under "buyer (recruit) beware" and something that
crosses the line. but sometimes "you know it when you
see it". for example, if you are buying a house but you
never bother to discover there is a frat house next door,
that's likely your fault. but in another case a friend
of a friend bought a house in los gatos and the sale was
reversed after 6mos because it turned out the house seller
had asked a autobody shop [or some other kind of industrial
operation] not to operate when he was showing the house.
[now if he hadnt colluded but had just picked a time when
the place was closed, maybe that would have passed muster].
there might have been other sleazy dealings too. i didnt
know the exact details but i had relatively little sympathy
for the people in gulf war 1 to bailed on their obligations
after taking advantage of the college and other benefits.
i would hope that given you are dealing with people
probably in the 16-20 range, it is potentially a matter of
life and death ... and certainly a major lifestyle choice,
and it is your govt after all, military recruitment would
be a more sober and serious and solemn process, but we
cerainly no better than that dont we. so we probably
are in 90% agreement ... but i suppose i see this
though the "big issues" [national service, wealth and
opportunity etc] rather than focusing on the sleaziness
of the army's salesmen. in re: the "i dont differentiate"
comment: consider the informed consent: everybody no
matter how dumb or how young who is more conscious than
terry schivo knows there is some chance of getting
killed or hurt in the military ... since it even
happens in training etc. people also know that your
chance of getting hurt/maimed or killed go way up
if you are sent to iraq ... it probably doesnt matter
whether that probability is .5% or .1% ... everyone
knows it is high enough to take notice of. but what
people dont know is what is the probability of their
being sent to iraq/afganistan upon joining the military
now ... is it 5% or 80%? further, they should reasonable
believe that the govt representative will either say
i dont know or not massively lie to them. expecting an
18yr old to "expect" the govt to lie to them doesnt seem
reasonable. although it's starting to be.
\- maybe this is a good example to bring out some of
my thinking: we think of cosmetic surgeons as perhaps
a little sleazy [the beverly hills kind, not the
charity and military ones]. and a patient really is
a customer and should be on the alert to beig pitched,
oversold, upsold etc ... i dont have much sympathy for
a young impressionable girl in for a nose job getting
talked into a lip puffing sugery "while your at it".
but if your real doctor says he hears something
"funny" with your mitral valve and you need to pay
more money to be probed so he can buy a new titaniam
golf device, that is totally beyond the pale since
there really may not be any good way for you to protect
your interests. you are totally in his hands ... that's
why this is supposed to be a relationship of solmn
trust [with threat of malpractice] rather than a
consumer relationship. so the ideal answer isnt
the consumer/patient/recruit should be careful in
both cases but society sould hold the person in the
position of trust to a higher standard ... unfortunately
that ideal doesnt always happen and perhaps caveat
emptor is "min max" strategy.
\_ Personal responsibility aside (if you're signing up
for the army, I'd hope that you are thinking about
what you are doing), there's a pretty major difference
between lying to sell aluminum siding and lying to get
someone to join the national "we can fuck up your life
send you to a place where you have a real possibility
of getting your ass brought home in a box, and all that
on false pretenses" club. I don't care if you're in
a war or not, it's criminal. -John |
http://csua.com/feed/