While sorting the mail into delivery sequence this morning, I noticed a magazine (the Republic, or something like that) with a photo of a child of around 11 or 12 in a military uniform with a weapon. The tag line referring to the story was something about military recruiters now approaching kids in the 6th grade age range.

Anyone seen this, or heard anything about this goin on, and whether it is targetting above average intelligence kids, or what?

The idea of kids being red-flagged for higher than average intelligence and such and being followed through their first twelve years of school is not a new idea, but I don't know that that is what the article is discussing.

With out reading it we already have military schools in this country for young kids to attend. If thats what you are refering to.

I don't think it was military schools being addressed, as the child was in combat uniform with weapon, like they had taken a photo of a soldier equipped for combat and superimposed the child's face. I think the article must be addressing something else.

Might it be referring to the more aggressive and far-reaching tactics of military recruiters in the wake of quota shortfalls?

Don't know what it might be referring to but I know America's Army is targetting kids as young as 13. For those not familiar, it is a free game designed by the Army.

http://www.americasarmy.com/

Tried it around 2 years ago not knowing any better. I've heard it has improved but it was mostly crap back then.

America's Army is much more refined these days. I enjoy it more than Counter Strike: Source myself (more realistic tactics and gameplay).

The last update upgraded the game to the Unreal 2.5 engine (looks great!).

Yes AAO is a promotional tool for the Army, but it doesn't blatantly ask you to join up or anything. It's GUI is really pretty independent and not an ad in sight.

Considering the number of countries that have mandatory military service, I think planting the seed of service in "younger" children isn't to terrible. I mean, the worst thing that might happen to them is they join the army, right?

Wolfenstein:enemy Territory is way better then AA without question and it is also free to download and play online.. here's a good server to play on to!

www.bpark3.com

Considering the number of countries that have mandatory military service, I think planting the seed of service in "younger" children isn't to terrible. I mean, the worst thing that might happen to them is they join the army, right?

This was always something I admired with the Israelis; you were required to serve in the military, male or female, to help implant the sense of ownership of the country within each generation. I do not like how the military has been used the last decade or two ( or three) but I strongly advocate the return to a draft that will require all between 18 and 25 to serve at least two or three years serving the country that they want to call their own.

Another advantage to having a draft and mandatory sevice is that it gives greater impetus to people to pay attention to foreign policy decisions by the leaders and to voice their opinions whether in agreement or dissent.

It allows for a much greater degree of commitment to one's country than these cute window flags, or bumper stickers, or ribbon magnets (although these are nice ways to show support of the troops).

I'll loan you my book copy of Starship Troopers, citizen.

'but I strongly advocate the return to a draft that will require all between 18 and 25 to serve at least two or three years serving the country that they want to call their own'

- Unless the country is some large imperial power like the US, engaged in more than one war at a time, I think the draft is a rather useless, and ineffective way of gaining a sense of national responsibility.
It's also quite an infringement on people's sense of liberty and freedom. Drafting or any sort of compulsory military service has had a happy absent place in Britain for all of its history until the First World War, and only then was it put in place when it was clear France would fall without some serious manpower. It was even absent during the darkest times of the Napoleonic Wars, it was the envy of pretty much every country. It survived the Second World War and was used briefly as a way to cover the loss of manpower from India to sustain the Empire after 1947, but was too unpopular to uphold.
Drafting, in short, in rather non-militaristic societies is pretty pointless. And anything that keeps 13 year olds away from such violent, gritty realities (such as the use of WEAPONS) will always be a plus outside the US.

Ack, the quick guns-are-evil poke at the end. If anything, of the gun owners I know, the ones with a history in the military seem more responsible than the ones without it. Of course, my sample size is small.

I went to military school, got to work with the M-16 and a grenades, been around guns my whole life never had any problems with them being used or misused. Of course I also was taught at an early age not to touch them with out permission, my mother made sure that lesson stuck after the first time, and no one in my family has had any gun related deaths or problems. its called being a responsible gun owner.

Back on topic, I was recruited by the military school due to my grades, athelticism, weapons skills, and hand to hand training. went for a year and found I had a problem with authority hehe, my sensie never had that problem with me but then again I couldnt whip his ass as easily as the army hand to hand folks. The country will always be on the look out for folks with above average skills in a variety of need areas, right now its linguistics especially arabic dialects and chinesse, execptional skill in physics and chemistry etc. Its only logical it allows you to make sure those with special talents are able to develop them to the fullest.

Rev