Thread: US soldiers committing more sex crimes

Originally Posted by Giftedone

One only needs consider the backgrounds of the majority of those who go into the military.

Many of the folks joining do so not because of any desire to serve their country but because there are little other opportunities available to them.

Folks from disadvantaged backgrounds tend to have a higher incidence of social abberation.

Rather than comparing stats from the population at large one should compare stats to that found in Harlem or the slums of Detroit.

I bet the rates would be far more similar.

You ignorantly perpetuate a myth.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj

In 2008, using data provided by the Defense Department, the Heritage Foundation found that only 11% of enlisted military recruits in 2007 came from the poorest one-fifth, or quintile, of American neighborhoods (as of the 2000 Census), while 25% came from the wealthiest quintile. Heritage reported that "these trends are even more pronounced in the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program, in which 40% of enrollees come from the wealthiest neighborhoods, a number that has increased substantially over the past four years."

.Indeed, the Heritage report showed that "low-income families are underrepresented in the military and high-income families are overrepresented. Individuals from the bottom household income quintile make up 20.0 percent of Americans who are age 18-24 years old but only 10.6 percent of the 2006 recruits and 10.7 percent of the 2007 recruits. Individuals in the top two quintiles make up 40.0 percent of the population, but 49.3 percent of the recruits in both years."

Do some research before making such statements.

Originally Posted by IgnoranceisBliss

You ignorantly perpetuate a myth.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj



Do some research before making such statements.

I did not realize .. my bad

Originally Posted by Giftedone

I did not realize .. my bad

I'm glad to see you admit your error, thats more than many on this forum can do.

Originally Posted by IgnoranceisBliss

I'm glad to see you admit your error, thats more than many on this forum can do.

It is not foolish to make mistakes .. we are all human.

What characterizes the fool is one who tries to maintain their position in spite of being shown to be in error.

Originally Posted by Giftedone

It is not foolish to make mistakes .. we are all human.

What characterizes the fool is one who tries to maintain their position in spite of being shown to be in error.

There is making a mistake, and then there is talking out of your arse to degrade military personnel. A mistake would be accidentally switching numbers in a statistic. You had absolutely no basis for your claim.

Originally Posted by Giftedone

Many of the folks joining do so not because of any desire to serve their country but because there are little other opportunities available to them.

The Making of an American Soldier: Why Young People Join the Military

' George Bush likes to say it's because they're patriots, but the truth may have more to do with financial need and recruiters targeting those with limited economic options. '

' Recruiters may not explicitly target "the poor," but there is mounting evidence that they target those whose career options are severely limited. According to a 2007 Associated Press analysis, "nearly three-fourths of [U.S. troops] killed in Iraq came from towns where the per capita income was below the national average. More than half came from towns where the percentage of people living in poverty topped the national average." '

http://www.alternet.org/story/52233/

Originally Posted by Uncle Meat

The Making of an American Soldier: Why Young People Join the Military

' George Bush likes to say it's because they're patriots, but the truth may have more to do with financial need and recruiters targeting those with limited economic options. '

' Recruiters may not explicitly target "the poor," but there is mounting evidence that they target those whose career options are severely limited. According to a 2007 Associated Press analysis, "nearly three-fourths of [U.S. troops] killed in Iraq came from towns where the per capita income was below the national average. More than half came from towns where the percentage of people living in poverty topped the national average." '

http://www.alternet.org/story/52233/

Your article is wrong. The source is also suspect at best and mostly conjecture. As my WSJ article clearly showed, the military is underrepresented in the lowest 20% of Americans and OVER represented in the top 20 and 40%.

Originally Posted by IgnoranceisBliss

Your article is wrong. .

So anything you post is correct, and anything anyone else posts, that's contrary to your beliefs, is "wrong"?

Hmmm, It doesn't really work like that.

The article is legitimate, until proven otherwise.

' Recruiters may not explicitly target "the poor," but there is mounting evidence that they target those whose career options are severely limited. According to a 2007 Associated Press analysis, "nearly three-fourths of [U.S. troops] killed in Iraq came from towns where the per capita income was below the national average. More than half came from towns where the percentage of people living in poverty topped the national average." '

Originally Posted by Uncle Meat

So anything you post is correct, and anything anyone else posts, that's contrary to your beliefs, is "wrong"?

Hmmm, It doesn't really work like that.

The article is legitimate, until proven otherwise.

' Recruiters may not explicitly target "the poor," but there is mounting evidence that they target those whose career options are severely limited. According to a 2007 Associated Press analysis, "nearly three-fourths of [U.S. troops] killed in Iraq came from towns where the per capita income was below the national average. More than half came from towns where the percentage of people living in poverty topped the national average." '

That's an extremely broad open ended statistic. It doesn't even say TROOPS come from families below the average...it only says they come from towns below average. How far below average? My article, the WSJ (very respected source) actually breaks down the economic background of the troops themselves, not their town. Thus it's more reliable.

Originally Posted by IgnoranceisBliss

My article, the WSJ (very respected source) actually breaks down the economic background of the troops themselves, not their town. Thus it's more reliable.

The author from my source:

Jorge Mariscal

"Mariscal, Jorge (George)
Associate Professor - Literature; Director - Chicano/a~Latino/a Arts and Humanities Program
Areas of Expertise: Chicano/Mexican cultures in the United States, history and role of Latinos in the U.S. military, Spanish and Latin American concepts of "race," U.S. social movements
Languages: Spanish/English"

http://www.universityofcalifornia.ed...uses/ucsd.html



The author from your source:

Anne Marlowe

"Marlowe published rock criticism in the early to mid 1990s in the Village Voice, LA Weekly, Artforum, and Spin."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Marlowe


I think it's pretty clear which source is more respected and reliable.