Harry Krause wrote in message
news:1100963019.X1mxwAoF0tv6hw5X7W3v0g@teranews...


Our military is a tool and willing partner. Its primary mission is to
perpetuate itself.


--


Ok. You have made your opinion very clear.

BTW, I understand your distinction between the "military" and the "military
institution" and, in that distinction, we are probably closer in thought. I
think it's important to be very clear in the communication of an opinion so
that it is not misunderstood. John Kerry didn't understand this and he
suffered for it.

Eisboch

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:09:27 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .

Nope. But I would be interested in your answer to my question.

John H


You took the trouble to post that item. Do you believe that liberals are
'girly men' and if you do...do you pass on your prejudices to your students?


You've still not answered the question.

What did that post have to do with teaching. Or, what does teaching
have to do with that post?

If by 'girly men' you mean 'effeminate', then I would say that some
liberals fit that description. Of course, some conservatives do also,
but that wasn't your question.

I pass on my prejudices regarding mathematics to my students at every
opportunity.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 11:44:42 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 06:37:13 GMT, "Eisboch"
wrote:


Harry Krause wrote in message
news:1100920343.rQA4M/wy9xpTzYE8lIGbDw@teranews...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:32:57 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

My experience tells me that the brightest young men and women (18-24 or
so) are in college. Some percentage of bright kids who cannot hack it in
college drop out and join the military, others drop out and do something
else. I posit that very, very few of our brightest 18-year-olds opt for
the military.

You could not be more wrong.

You are letting your predilection for partisan causes cloud your
vision, Harry. I thought better of you.

Later,

Tom


Are you positing that the brightest young men and women in this country
(in the 18-24 age category) go into the military instead of going to
college? Or thoat some bright kids who drop out of college end up in the
military? Or that others who drop out of college do something else?

What percentage of really bright young people, those with academic
skills and high college boards, skip college to join the Army of One? I
would guess a really, really small percentage. I'll bet there are stats
somewhere that back up my position.

I'm not claming that *everyone* in the military is stupid, or even less
bright than average. I'm positing that there is little incentive for our
brightest kids to join the military instead of going to college.

And what's partisan about that?

Here's something else to consider. Many anti- and non- intellectuals in
this country will frequently say "Those who can, do...those who cannot,
teach." Well, I think that is bull****. "Those that can, do...and many
of those teach. And those who cannot, well, they ..............

I'll let you finish that on your own.



I'll finish it. You are wrong.

High college boards and academic skills are not the only criteria to judge
how bright an individual is, nor are they any indication of their value or
contribution to society. Some of the most accomplished people I know would
be considered stupid according to your measure.

As to why young people join the military, there are as many reasons as there
are people that join. If you really think that people serving 4 years of
their life in the military are doing so simply because they can't hack it as
a civilian, you have really missed something important in life.

Good grief, Harry, just think. If everyone were as smart as you, you would
be average.

I'd love to have Harry look my oldest son in the eye and tell him just
how lame he is. Or my oldest daughter who was in the Navy.

I like Harry, but sometimes, he just jumps and doesn't look and it
sours his relations with people who would be friendly.

Live long and prosper,

Tom

Hang in there, Tom. Harry will weasel himself back into your good
graces, or at least try. He doesn't have many who 'like' him for the
very reason you describe.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:12:14 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:32:57 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

My experience tells me that the brightest young men and women (18-24 or
so) are in college. Some percentage of bright kids who cannot hack it in
college drop out and join the military, others drop out and do something
else. I posit that very, very few of our brightest 18-year-olds opt for
the military.

You could not be more wrong.

You are letting your predilection for partisan causes cloud your
vision, Harry. I thought better of you.

Later,

Tom


Are you positing that the brightest young men and women in this country
(in the 18-24 age category) go into the military instead of going to
college? Or thoat some bright kids who drop out of college end up in the
military? Or that others who drop out of college do something else?

What percentage of really bright young people, those with academic
skills and high college boards, skip college to join the Army of One? I
would guess a really, really small percentage. I'll bet there are stats
somewhere that back up my position.

I'm not claming that *everyone* in the military is stupid, or even less
bright than average. I'm positing that there is little incentive for our
brightest kids to join the military instead of going to college.

And what's partisan about that?

Here's something else to consider. Many anti- and non- intellectuals in
this country will frequently say "Those who can, do...those who cannot,
teach." Well, I think that is bull****. "Those that can, do...and many
of those teach. And those who cannot, well, they ..............

I'll let you finish that on your own.

Harry, you know nothing of the military other than what you've read in
the Washington Post.

You are getting good at the "Weasel Dance" though!

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 10:03:33 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
Harry Krause wrote in message
news:1100958988.eHbW4nrZO30sidk9GFsjeA@teranews...

I'm sorry, but I have very little respect for "the military" as an
institution. As it exists today, it is an obsolete institution built
upon lies, deceit and self-perpetuation and is virtually useless in
defending the United States from the kind of aggression we face these
days. Simply stated, our military cannot defend us from the terrorists
who want to create havoc and death within the borders of the United
States.


Whew... I think it's the policy makers Harry, not the "military".

Oh? Please explain how "our military" plans to defend a major American
city from a couple of guys driving into the center of it in a rental van
with a nuke inside. You don't really think hordes of terrorists are
planning to come ashore via LSTs at Newport, Rhode Island, do you?

Remember, our military is supposed to defend the homeland. Something it
is incapable of doing in the face of modern terrorist warfare.

The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide the military
forces needed to deter war and to protect the security of our country.

The mission of the Department of Homeland Security is stated below:

We (DHS) will lead the unified national effort to secure America. We
will prevent and deter terrorist attacks and protect against and
respond to threats and hazards to the nation. We will ensure safe and
secure borders, welcome lawful immigrants and visitors, and promote
the free-flow of commerce.

The military is not responsible for your rental van terrorists, nor
should it be. You need to direct your acrimony towards the appropriate
agencies.


John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:21:47 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote in message
...


I'd love to have Harry look my oldest son in the eye and tell him just
how lame he is. Or my oldest daughter who was in the Navy.

I like Harry, but sometimes, he just jumps and doesn't look and it
sours his relations with people who would be friendly.

Live long and prosper,

Tom


I don't dislike Harry. I dislike or disagree with some of his statements and
assertions.
Sadly though, the statement in question here was not a "jump" on his part.
He truly believes what he says and has made similar comments often over the
years. It is obviously a result of his own background, education and
experience and is consistent with his basic political views.

You're jumping from my generalizations to specific individuals. My point
is this: generally speaking, our brightest 18-24 year olds do not enlist
in the military. Our brightest youngsters in that age category head for
college. If you have some legitimate statistics that dispute my posit,
I'll be glad to look at them. I'm NOT saying that no bright kids head
for the military, because certainly some do. But the brightest kids have
better options.

I recently read a couple of articles that indicated the Army was
planning on lowering the mental ability standards in its "admission
tests" to accommodate the kinds of enlistees it was getting these days.
If that is the case, it does not bode well for the "best and brightest"
claim.


I am not offended because my son is currently in the military either. What
Harry doesn't seem to understand is that many, including both my sons and
frankly myself served because we felt an obligation to do so, driven by
personal reasons that include old fashioned patriotism.

Oh, sure. I wouldn't dispute that. It's too bad that their patriotism is
being squandered by a neocon fascist administration, though, eh? And
that the institution they serve - the military - is so corrupt and
self-serving. As I have stated any number of times, I have respect for
individual soliders, but not much for "the military" as an institution.


More importantly,
the experience of giving something of importance which is greater than one's
own self interests is an important lesson that serves one well in life in my
opinion.

Indeed...which is why I have so much respect for classroom teachers,
firemen, nurses, case workers, religious workers who truly help the poor
and the sick, and soldiers involved in genuine, multi-national
peacekeeping efforts that stop wars.

What a weasel. Your "respect for classroom teachers" can be seen in
the many negative comments you've made about teachers.

Harry, you're just like Kerry. You say whatever you think will be well
received by the audience you're trying to impress.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:27:42 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 10:03:33 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
Harry Krause wrote in message
news:1100958988.eHbW4nrZO30sidk9GFsjeA@teranews...

I'm sorry, but I have very little respect for "the military" as an
institution. As it exists today, it is an obsolete institution built
upon lies, deceit and self-perpetuation and is virtually useless in
defending the United States from the kind of aggression we face these
days. Simply stated, our military cannot defend us from the terrorists
who want to create havoc and death within the borders of the United
States.


Whew... I think it's the policy makers Harry, not the "military".

Oh? Please explain how "our military" plans to defend a major American
city from a couple of guys driving into the center of it in a rental van
with a nuke inside. You don't really think hordes of terrorists are
planning to come ashore via LSTs at Newport, Rhode Island, do you?

Remember, our military is supposed to defend the homeland. Something it
is incapable of doing in the face of modern terrorist warfare.

The mission of the Department of Defense is.

The mission of the Department of Homeland Security

It doesn't matter. Neither of them can defend the homeland.

What doesn't matter is your lack of subject knowledge.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:28:25 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:21:47 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote in message
...


I'd love to have Harry look my oldest son in the eye and tell him just
how lame he is. Or my oldest daughter who was in the Navy.

I like Harry, but sometimes, he just jumps and doesn't look and it
sours his relations with people who would be friendly.

Live long and prosper,

Tom


I don't dislike Harry. I dislike or disagree with some of his statements and
assertions.
Sadly though, the statement in question here was not a "jump" on his part.
He truly believes what he says and has made similar comments often over the
years. It is obviously a result of his own background, education and
experience and is consistent with his basic political views.

You're jumping from my generalizations to specific individuals. My point
is this: generally speaking, our brightest 18-24 year olds do not enlist
in the military. Our brightest youngsters in that age category head for
college. If you have some legitimate statistics that dispute my posit,
I'll be glad to look at them. I'm NOT saying that no bright kids head
for the military, because certainly some do. But the brightest kids have
better options.

I recently read a couple of articles that indicated the Army was
planning on lowering the mental ability standards in its "admission
tests" to accommodate the kinds of enlistees it was getting these days.
If that is the case, it does not bode well for the "best and brightest"
claim.


I am not offended because my son is currently in the military either. What
Harry doesn't seem to understand is that many, including both my sons and
frankly myself served because we felt an obligation to do so, driven by
personal reasons that include old fashioned patriotism.

Oh, sure. I wouldn't dispute that. It's too bad that their patriotism is
being squandered by a neocon fascist administration, though, eh? And
that the institution they serve - the military - is so corrupt and
self-serving. As I have stated any number of times, I have respect for
individual soliders, but not much for "the military" as an institution.


More importantly,
the experience of giving something of importance which is greater than one's
own self interests is an important lesson that serves one well in life in my
opinion.

Indeed...which is why I have so much respect for classroom teachers,
firemen, nurses, case workers, religious workers who truly help the poor
and the sick, and soldiers involved in genuine, multi-national
peacekeeping efforts that stop wars.

What a weasel. Your "respect for classroom teachers" can be seen in
the many negative comments you've made about teachers.

Bull. I've made negative comments about *you* as a teacher.

You lie, Harry.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:28:25 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:21:47 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote in message
...


I'd love to have Harry look my oldest son in the eye and tell him just
how lame he is. Or my oldest daughter who was in the Navy.

I like Harry, but sometimes, he just jumps and doesn't look and it
sours his relations with people who would be friendly.

Live long and prosper,

Tom


I don't dislike Harry. I dislike or disagree with some of his statements and
assertions.
Sadly though, the statement in question here was not a "jump" on his part.
He truly believes what he says and has made similar comments often over the
years. It is obviously a result of his own background, education and
experience and is consistent with his basic political views.

You're jumping from my generalizations to specific individuals. My point
is this: generally speaking, our brightest 18-24 year olds do not enlist
in the military. Our brightest youngsters in that age category head for
college. If you have some legitimate statistics that dispute my posit,
I'll be glad to look at them. I'm NOT saying that no bright kids head
for the military, because certainly some do. But the brightest kids have
better options.

I recently read a couple of articles that indicated the Army was
planning on lowering the mental ability standards in its "admission
tests" to accommodate the kinds of enlistees it was getting these days.
If that is the case, it does not bode well for the "best and brightest"
claim.


I am not offended because my son is currently in the military either. What
Harry doesn't seem to understand is that many, including both my sons and
frankly myself served because we felt an obligation to do so, driven by
personal reasons that include old fashioned patriotism.

Oh, sure. I wouldn't dispute that. It's too bad that their patriotism is
being squandered by a neocon fascist administration, though, eh? And
that the institution they serve - the military - is so corrupt and
self-serving. As I have stated any number of times, I have respect for
individual soliders, but not much for "the military" as an institution.


More importantly,
the experience of giving something of importance which is greater than one's
own self interests is an important lesson that serves one well in life in my
opinion.

Indeed...which is why I have so much respect for classroom teachers,
firemen, nurses, case workers, religious workers who truly help the poor
and the sick, and soldiers involved in genuine, multi-national
peacekeeping efforts that stop wars.

What a weasel. Your "respect for classroom teachers" can be seen in
the many negative comments you've made about teachers.

Bull. I've made negative comments about *you* as a teacher.

I stand corrected. You*have* made negative comments about me as a
teacher (never having seen me in the classroom, which again shows your
profound lack of knowledge). However, the 'bull' part is a lie. You
have denigrated the teaching profession. Now weasel out of it.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:06:02 GMT, "Eisboch"
wrote:


Short Wave Sportfishing wrote in message
.. .


I'd love to have Harry look my oldest son in the eye and tell him just
how lame he is. Or my oldest daughter who was in the Navy.

I like Harry, but sometimes, he just jumps and doesn't look and it
sours his relations with people who would be friendly.

Live long and prosper,

Tom


I don't dislike Harry. I dislike or disagree with some of his statements and
assertions.
Sadly though, the statement in question here was not a "jump" on his part.
He truly believes what he says and has made similar comments often over the
years. It is obviously a result of his own background, education and
experience and is consistent with his basic political views.

I am not offended because my son is currently in the military either. What
Harry doesn't seem to understand is that many, including both my sons and
frankly myself served because we felt an obligation to do so, driven by
personal reasons that include old fashioned patriotism. More importantly,
the experience of giving something of importance which is greater than one's
own self interests is an important lesson that serves one well in life in my
opinion.

I agree with you. I'm not offended either, it's just that a
particular viewpoint from somebody who is clearly smart and well
spoken is offensive in that it's driven not by fact but by ideology.
Ideology is all it's facets offends me a great deal. It's almost as
if ideology forces you to become what you most despise - if that makes
any sense. To put it another way, the lefter you go, the righter you
get. :)

My two are incredibly smart, one is still in (career) and one is a
Reservist who, incidentally, is married to a career Naval Officer.
The fact that one graduated from Suma from Case Western and the other
Magna from Tufts kind belies Harry's reasoning, yes? :)

It is not unique to the United States and it does not necessarily mean you
agree with the policy makers. For most, it's a short, four year experience.
In my case, I managed through nine years of active duty, driven primarily
because the Navy kept offering interesting schools. I realize now that I
got a lot more out of my service than I gave. What Harry thinks just doesn't
matter.

Finally, from personal experience, I attended college for a while after high
school, then entered the Navy. (I guess to Harry I was a non-hacker). I
finished my degree requirements at night after I was discharged and the
majority of those I took classes with had also been recently discharged.
(Thank you, GI bill). The attitude and motivation of those attending after
military service was very, very different than the knuckleheads (including
me) that attended right out of high school.

I had a similar experience, only I was offered an Lead
Instructor/Trainer slot which are highly prized in the Corps and I
took advantage of it. I reenlisted for two years, taught one week in
three and made arrangements for that week with the professors where I
was attending. When I finished my six years, I was a year and a half
shy of graduation as a General Engineer and when they credited my
advanced math/science placement, I had to do one semester in
humanities and a half semester electives - which in my case was more
math. :) I even got to play a little college baseball (taxi squad
unfortunately).

Even with two combat tours, I wouldn't trade the experience for
anything.

And with that, I shall remove myself from this discussion permanently.

Peace. Out.

Later,

Tom

"Beware the one legged man in a butt
kicking contest - he is there for a
reason."

Wun Hung Lo - date unknown