History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.
Last week*, the major general in charge of the U.S. Army Recruiting Command held a press briefing to discuss the army's recruiting problems. The most interesting part was this little-noticed exchange on the topic of"influencers" (emphasis added):
GEN. ROCHELLE: I don't believe anyone believes it's a life or death situation. Is it challenging? Yes. It's challenging under the very best of conditions. Today's conditions represent the most challenging conditions we have seen in recruiting in my 33 years in this uniform. We are faced with very low unemployment; the first time that the all-volunteer force has been challenged in sustained land combat -- I believe that the total casualties are up over 8,000. And in point of fact, we now have very, very low propensity to enlist, both on the part of our young Americans and likewise on the part of influencers -- and by that, I mean parents, coaches, other adults whose opinions matter to our young 17-to-24-year-olds -- to recommend Army service. Those couple to provide a very, very challenging environment.
Yes, ma'am?
Q: Could you explain why you think that parents and young people don't have a propensity to join?
GEN. ROCHELLE: I don't have a lot of research to answer that question, merely Department of Defense-level research that does tell us -- and it's a quarterly research -- biannually, excuse me, that does tell us that parents are less inclined today than they were immediately after September 11th to recommend.
Q: But if you don't have reasons, you can't address that. Knowing that they are less inclined is one thing, but knowing why they are less inclined allows you to address the problem.
GEN. ROCHELLE: Well, if we attempt to address every problem, I think it would simply water down our message. What we are attempting to do is focus on the value of service. And the secretary of the Army has launched a campaign -- (pause) -- a call to duty campaign. I was going to say call to service, but it's in fact call to duty campaign, which elevates service to a whole different level -- elevates it to the level of patriotism; elevates it to the level of service to country, service to nation.
(snip)
Q: General?
GEN. ROCHELLE: Yes?
Q: Can you comment a little bit more on the data on influencers? I mean, how much further down is it compared to September 11th? And is it simply that we're in an extended conflict in Iraq that's driving it down, you know, compared to the patriotic fervor after September 11th, or how do you explain it?
GEN. ROCHELLE: Let me see if I can recall the numbers. I believe that shortly after September the 11th, the propensity for influencers was measured at about the 22 percent who would say, yes, I would recommend military service to a young man or woman of recruitment age. And the last data point I saw, it's down to -- I think it's 14 percent, if that gives you some relative scope.
Would I attribute it to any single factor? No, sir, I would not. I think it's far more complex than that.
Now, this is obviously total bullshit. Twice a year, the Department of Defense compiles data on"influencers," finding out if they are encouraging or discouraging the enlistment of young people under their influence. Currently the military knows that most influencers are sharply opposed to the enlistment of young people they know...but they have no idea why, and apparently haven't even thought to ask. La la la, fingers in our ears, la la la.
Because the elephant in the room (and I think I may actually mean that as a pun) is that large numbers of people who sport yellow ribbon bumperstickers on their cars -- sorry, their SUVs -- and tell pollsters that they support the war in Iraq don't actually support the war in the sense that they want anyone they know to fight in it. The enlistment numbers, and the dynamic behind them, suggest quite strongly that the American project in Iraq is unsustainable. Wars require bodies in uniform, and the trend for that commodity is down, down, down. However many Americans"support" the war, the fact is that fourteen percent support the war.
(*On the day I was getting married -- this is why it has taken me a week to begin commenting on old news, yes. I think it's a pretty good excuse.)
in other words, let's go back and blame the 1960's again for all that went wrong in america. i wonder if there's a medication for THAT condition?
Whitney Sprague -
5/31/2005
Not at all...it's what I get for attempting to write on strong migraine meds. Make that thirty-forty years rather than twenty-thirty.
steve heeren -
5/30/2005
you say, "cultural selfishness that's come together in the last 20-30 years." That implies it began during the Reagan era. is that your take on developments?
Whitney Sprague -
5/29/2005
Three comrades and his fiancee all presented the protagonist with white feathers, all symbolizing cowardice for his refusal to rejoin his unit after a well-time resignation of his commission.
Kevin Black -
5/29/2005
Here is my perspective on the question why young people join the military.
Matt, my 21 year-old son, joined the Army on September 30, 2004 for a variety of reasons.
1. College was not for him. He disliked school throughout secondary school. He didn't fall into one of the prominent peer groups, disliked pointless (as he saw it) course work, and was generally unhappy at school. He completed one semester of college and that was it for him.
2. No jobs. He grew up in rural western Oklahoma. No real opportunities for non-college types unless they work in the oil field, which is a morass of meth and dangerous manuel labor. He wasn't interested in either.
3. Tradition of military service in our family. Two uncles in the Pacific in WWII. Two grandfaters, one a decorated tank commander in Europe. One uncle retired with 25 years in the Army, a cousin with 20 years in the Navy. Three cousins in Vietnam, two Navy and One Army. Greatgrandfater gassed in WWI. Great-great grandfather in the 4th Arkansas, CSA.
4. Job training and benefits after leaving the Army.
5. Why the Army? Couldn't meet the weight standards for any other service.
6. Matt is with the 101st Airborne. He deploys this fall.
I (and he) opposed Bush's war from the start. But the economic conditions, Matt's personal choices, demographics, and family tradition drove him towards the military.
7. Support the soldier, oppose the war.
Whitney Sprague -
5/29/2005
The "gung ho" enlistments only ever work shortly after or during a major national crisis. You're right; no one believes we are currently in deep national crisis. This leaves the military in a strange place, calling on the old standbys of duty, honor and country, yet throwing in the bennies of the GI Bill and enlistment bonuses when that pesky issue of actual combat risks pops up. I truly believe that they need to go back to the bennies advertising to bump up numbers. Guard and Reserve service has traditional appealed not to those who "wanted to do their bit" but to those who needed the extra cash and the extra help, and the biggest hit in the numbers is in the Guard and Reserves. Wars are fought by the Billy Rays and Duwaynes of our country, and they're the ones who aren't enlisting now - especially in the black community. The military is no longer seen as a main, respectable way out of the holler and the ghetto - and that's a huge cultural shift that's to be blamed on a lot more than Iraq and Abu Ghraib. I think Iraq is just the final straw in the Perfect Storm of cultural selfishness that's come together in the last twenty-thirty years.
Whitney Sprague -
5/29/2005
I never thought of Colin Powell as a junior member of the Depression/WWII generation; he was after all a key member of the of the drive to professionalize an all-volunteer Army. While he served as a young officer during Viet Nam, it was his drive to prevent the post-Nam breakdown of discipline, drive, and performance that help create the strong voluntary force we have today. Those bodies that were serving in those ugly days, by the way, were Boomers.
Chris Bray -
5/28/2005
"But it seems to me that the obvious question that is missing throughout the briefing is: why do people join the military anyway?"
One of the main reasons people join the military is that they think something important is at stake for their country. The underlying message of that fourteen percent "influencer" support for enlistment is that most people don't believe the war in Iraq has anything at all to do with their personal security, or with any vital national interest. If young people believed the "we're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here" argument, they'd be enlisting; people will fight to protect their families and friends, and encourage others to do the same. Enlisting is off because people don't want to die for nothing, and they have come to view the war in Iraq as a war for nothing. The nation as a whole is not going to arouse itself to support the sustainment of a colonial constabulary.
The administration has succeeded in creating the sights and sounds of support -- yellow ribbon bumperstickers, which mean precisely nothing -- but not heartfelt and serious support. The next question is whether the product is inherently unappealing or just poorly marketed. But "they're attacking us so often because they're desperate, which proves that they're losing" is not the kind of message that's likely to pump up those enlistment numbers.
Jonathan Dresner -
5/28/2005
Thanks. Now I'm curious: what were the other three feathers, and does anyone use these symbols anymore?
Louis N Proyect -
5/28/2005
My friend Stan Goff, who was a career soldier, is now involved with the antiwar movement. After reading General Rochelle's comments on my listserv, he sent me this note and encouraged the widest distribution:
There are stories all over the news about the trickery employed by enlisted recruiters to meet their quotas. This appeal is not in any way designed to support or defend helping enlistees to get fake high school diplomas or cheat on a piss-test. BUT...
...just as with the Abu Ghraib scandals, we think there is a deeper story here that is not being told, and as usual the enlisted personnel are being set up to take the whole fall for policies that are being pushed - with an element of plausible deniability for the brass - that are being buried in all the military hoopla about re-training E-5, E-6, and E-7 recruiters on military "values."
We also know, many of us veterans ourselves, of the immense power the military has to get even when people speak out.
ANY MILITARY RECRUITER who has a story to tell about how he or she was encouraged, cajoled, bullied, or otherwise pressured to "make quota or else" can send your accounts to us at BTHN@mfso.org, and we will publish credible accounts, as we protect you and your location to prevent retaliation.
We have never concealed out agenda to stop the same war that is putting you into the position you are in to "make quota," and we want to hear your stories whether or not you agree with our position on the war. As veterans and military families, we are not just opposed to the war against Iraq, we are opposed to high-level officials, officers and Department of Defense officials, going scot-free and letting enlisted personnel swing slowly in the breeze for policies and practices that they directly or indirectly pressured you into. WE WILL NOT VIOLATE YOUR CONFIDENTIALITY. We will only publish as much information as you permit. If you want to name names, we'll do that; but if you need a layer of protection, we will do that, too. We want the whole story out, and we do NOT believe that this bullshit "re-training in military values" for a "few bad apples" is the whole story. As people experienced in the ways of the military, we suspect there are pressures here going unreported, and we also suspect that - as always - a few enlisted people will get to take any falls.
Contact us. We are not just against the war. We are against abuses of power that blame the most powerless.
Oscar Chamberlain -
5/28/2005
Certainly opposition to the Vietnam War was a major factor in eliminating the draft. To that extent Boomers had a role.
However, it was also due to the desire of many military leaders to create a better trained military than was possible with a large draftee base.
It was also, in may ways, a return to an old tradition. Before 1941, there had never been a peace time draft.
Finally, with rare exception, the politicians who implemented it grew up or came of age during World War II.
It was members of the "Greatest Generation" who created the volunteer army.
Whitney Sprague -
5/28/2005
You'll notice the current Army advertising does point out the training and the GI Bill bennies.
Alan Allport -
5/28/2005
Of course, problems with service discipline are not new:
"As a naval officer I abhor the implication that the Royal Navy is a haven for cannibalism. It is well known that we now have the problem relatively under control, and that it is the RAF who now suffer the largest casualties in this area. And what do you think the Argylls ate in Aden. Arabs? Yours etc. Captain B.J. Smethwick in a white wine sauce with shallots, mushrooms and garlic."
But it seems to me that the obvious question that is missing throughout the briefing is: why do people join the military anyway? General Rochelle alludes to only two possibilities: peer pressure from 'initiators', and love of country ("Well, among other things, we're appealing more to the sense of patriotism. (Clears throat.) Pardon me." Beautiful if accidental bit of transcription that). But the stress on initiators only pushes the real question further back. Why do parents encourage their children to join the services? The good general is forced to fall back once more on calls to duty: "service to country, service to nation." Well, yes. I'm sure these things are important. But common sense suggests that there's a lot more going on in recruits' minds than that. Why can't the military admit this more straightforwardly? They've surely considered what you might call 'non-patriotic' factors in enlistment. At least I hope they have.
Sharon Howard -
5/28/2005
It's a symbol of a coward. Men who didn't rush to sign up for the 1st World War in 1914/15 were given white feathers, in Britain anyway. (At least, that's the main association, although it's older than that: the book _The Four Feathers_ was published in 1902.)
Jonathan Dresner -
5/28/2005
Aside from the fact that I clearly don't get the main reference in the title, I still think that part of our problem is the mythology of the "all volunteer" military as a calling and its members as supererogatory patriots. It's great that we have a volunteer military, and you really do want the military to be pretty patriotic, but we've set the bar pretty high.
Pop culture quiz: what was the last mainstream military comedy, TV or movie? I can't think of anything really later than *M*A*S*H* and Stripes. Something where military guys are portrayed as pretty much everyday folks? I suppose there's Saving Private Ryan but that fits pretty neatly into the traditional WWII unit movies model and is about WWII, not more recent people or events. Oh, wait, Good Morning, Vietnam.... Hmm.
Whitney Sprague -
5/28/2005
These "influencers" are those who grew up after the end of the draft, and so have no clue themselves about the nature and value of military service. The vast, vast majority of them never had to (or chose to) "do their bit." One more sign of the decline of community in this country, of the the rapid rise of selfishness and cowardice that's just one more legacy of the Boomers. I know from my own service and my years as a military wife that those who enlisted and were successful were most often from families that already had a veteran, either as a parent, uncle, cousin, or grandparent, someone older to set an example and lead the way. I've believed for years that we need to bring back some form of mandatory national service, pulling our young people out of their own heads and into a sense of national community.
