Surging unemployment thanks to the increasingly powerful oligarchs at the Federal [sic] Reserve, Pentagon baiting and the avatar of a president for peace has created a surge in military recruiting to avoid hopelessness. Ann Scott Tyson at The Washington Post (WaPo) reports the Pentagon cites “economic downturn and rising joblessness, as well as bonuses and other factors” have manufactured a “historic” boom in the U.S. military recruiting. This is the first time in the 35-year history of the U.S. volunteer forces that the military has surpassing all of its recruiting goals by 3%—bringing in 168,000 volunteers.
“In recent years, the military has often fallen short of some of its recruiting targets. The Army, in particular, has struggled to fill its ranks, admitting more high school dropouts, overweight youths and even felons,” Ms. Tyson reports, adding:
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are considered by experts to be an unprecedented test of the volunteer military’s resilience. Its ability to bring fresh recruits into the force is critical not only to increasing the overall size of the Army and Marine Corps, but to ensuring that additional units are available to rotate into conflict zones. Some Army units sent overseas recently have been deployed at less than full strength….
The recession “was a force,” Bill Carr [deputy undersecretary of defense for military personnel policy, said at a Pentagon news conference], and, “given the unemployment that we had not directly forecast, allowed us to be for much of the year in a very favorable position.”
Historically, there has been a strong correlation between rising unemployment and increases in “high quality” enlistments, according to Curt Gilroy, the Pentagon’s director of accession policy.
Carr said the Defense Department spent about $10,000 on advertising, marketing, recruiters and other budget items per recruit, with the Army spending more than double that, at $22,000.
“The unemployment . . . left us with more dollars per recruit than proved to be minimally necessary,” he said.
Carr also credited hefty enlistment bonuses for the military’s success, saying 40 percent of recruits received an average bonus of $14,000, compared with $12,000 on average in 2008. The size of the bonus varied by service, with the Army, which has the toughest mission, offering more.
The same banksters who manufactured this recession and unemployment surge are financially and morally [sic] supported escalating the warfare portion of the State. “Speaking at a conference for the American Bankers Association, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury David S. Cohen went into excruciating detail about his department’s role in ensuring that the American banking industry is on the front lines of fights the world over,” Jason Ditz reports at AntiWar.com.
In addition to the Iraq and Afghanistan occupations for the oligarchs, ” it really is the world over,” Mr. Ditz reports. “From propping up Mexico’s government in what he called ‘a courageous fight against the drug cartels’ to preventing Iran from ‘developing nuclear weapons,’ there appears to be no overseas endeavor in which Secretary Cohen doesn’t envision a massive role for the Treasury Department, and for the ostensibly private organizations that make up the banking industry.”
People stand up in a fiery rage when teenage girl celebrities pose semi-nude in suggestive manners for the magazines and billboards. If you’ve missed it, the military’s advertising and marketing tactics have been borderline abusive. All of the crafters of these campaigns are from Madison Avenue, funded by Wall Street. The election of Barack Obama, engineered by these same cynical Madison suits, was the best recruiting tool they could’ve asked for. Who cares whether or not Mr. Obama is escalating the U.S. warfare State? When manufacturing consent, it only matters what the consumers believe: phony slogans. Cui bono?
Michael O’Hanlon, one of the Iraq War cheer-leasers at the neoconservative Brookings Institution, told WaPo the U.S. military is suffering “strains that are tragic in personal lives” and : “There is no way to tell at what point the Army will break in the sense of mass desertion, or people unwilling to stay in, or not meeting recruiting quotas.”
Ms. Tyson doesn’t report that such “mass desertion” is a result of low morale among the troops because they know they’re fighting aggressive wars backed by Mr. O’Hanlon. Their ‘brothers’ are dying around them and those who aren’t are becoming family annihilators and suicidal.
How many more kids will the oligarchical war machine have to have their hopelessness and youthful naïveté exploited for the power and profit of the few before mothers, fathers and teachers wake up to this sociopathic, manufactured cannon fodder institution?