Harry Krause wrote:
On 11/21/2006 7:58 AM, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 07:32:33 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 11/21/2006 7:21 AM, JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 11:25:01 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 02:11:47 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

US Navy, so must include boats.
Weapons control we can live with.
http://www.whc.net/rjones/USN/USN_team.html
Pfffhhhtt.....

Marine Corps Silent Drill Team is better.

Squids....
The Army's Old Guard puts them all to shame.
I don't understand the purpose of these displays. Are they part of
recruitment programs?

It's a demonstration of martial skill with a weapon. It takes a lot
of discipline, control, timing to handle weapons like that. It's like
a karate kata display only with heavy wooden rifles instead of
nun-chuka, swords, knifes, those tuning fork thingies, smashing blocks
with you're forehead - you know. :)

As to recruiting, eh - maybe it's a benefit to the recruiting process,
but not by much.

Of course if Charlie Rangel has his way, all those poor, uneducated,
under represented social classes currently in the military will be
enhanced by the draft which will force rich/middle class, educated,
over represented social classes into the military thus ending the need
for drill team displays if only because we all know that the
rich/middle class, educated and over represented social classes would
just end up throwing the rifles at each other instead of to each
other.


I appreciate the skill. It's certainly nothing I could do. But I don't
understand why soldiers are engaged in those kinds of activities when we
are short of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

You don't understand Rangel's purpose. He doesn't want to reinstate the
draft. He wants us to think about the fact that the poor and
ill-educated and rural are over-represented in the military, and that
the sacrifices endured by these folks and their families are not shared
by those with more money, education, etc.

CalI it what you may, but I think I understand Rangel's purpose. He
wants to re-instate the draft. Pure and simple. If he didn't, he
wouldn't be sponsoring a bill to re instate it.
Or is his case one of, ?I wasn't for it when I started it???