In a recent report written by Tim Kane, Ph.D., titled, “Who Are the Recruits? The Demographic, Characteristics of U.S. Military Enlistment, 2003–2005” published by the Heritage Foundation, Dr. Kane’s research reached the following conclusions:

1. The November 2005 Heritage Foundation study found that recruits enlisting at the start of the war were of high quality and in many respects comparable to the youth population. This updated report’s examination of three years of wartime recruits shows that recruit quality has not declined.

2. The estimate for mean household income of recruits increased every year from 2003 through 2005. The poorest areas continue to be underrepresented, while middle-class areas are overrepresented. Although the richest income brackets are underrepresented, the difference between the recruit and population proportions for these brackets is less than 0.25 percent. Overall, the distribution for recruit household incomes is very similar to that of the youth population.

3. The enlisted ranks are not disproportionately composed of minorities. Whites serve in numbers roughly proportional to their representation in the population. While blacks continue to be overrepresented, their representation has decreased during the wartime years and is much closer to being proportional in 2005 than it was in 2003. Additionally, recruiters are not targeting black-concentrated areas in an effort to exploit the black population.

4. With regard to income, education, race, and regional background, the all-volunteer force is representative of our nation and meets standards set by Congress and the Department of Defense. In contrast to the patronizing slanders of antiwar critics, recruit quality is increasing as the war in Iraq continues.

There you have it.  Our military recruits compare favorably to the general population.  So the only explanation for these above average men and women who subject themselves to 140 degree Iraqi summers, wearing heavy gear as the play dodge ball with IEDs is that they must be certifiable lunatics.  Oh, I guess there could be some other reasons, as Dr. Kane suggests:

In the military, it is especially questionable to claim that measurable characteristics accurately reflect what really matters: courage, honor, integrity, loyalty, and leadership.

Bark back and take the poll at our forum http://www.oldwardogs.org/index.php?topic=36

Contributed by The Gray Dog on November 4, 2006 at 12:53 PM in Caring about our troops, Current Affairs, Iraq, Patriotism, Politics, The American Warrior, The Gray Dog | Permalink

Comments

Posted by: Rurik

Perhaps they are. Just imagine, if we vote wrong on Tuesday, those troops might find themsleves fighting for Kerry and Pelosi and Murtha or even a president Clinton! -- how to say it? -- "No blood for oily politicians".

Posted by: Rurik | Nov 4, 2006 3:14:19 PM

Posted by: 1st Cav

Hooah! We have the best troops in the world!

Posted by: 1st Cav | Nov 5, 2006 5:24:09 PM

Post a comment

Comments accept simple HTML for formatting and linking.

Comments are moderated and may not appear on the site immediately. Comments in violation of our comment policy will never appear on the site.

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451e4ed69e200e5506f3bc98833

Trackbacks are moderated and do not appear immediately. Trackbacks from posts that do not link to this post will be deleted and will never be visible here.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Our Troops Aren’t Stupid. They Must be Crazy!: