Supporting troops: A bipartisan consensus amidst polarization
By: Kevin M. Schmiegel (The Hill)
Oh, no. If the military can't recruit enough suckers, err... patriots, then the country would have to rely upon citizen militias. And a President Kamala Harris couldn't lead the country into another quagmire without politically expendable troops.
We might even have to resort to military veterans teaching gun classes in public schools (like happened with Vietnam). But, of course, the veteran that had his face burned off by napalm won't be allowed to address the kiddies. The optics would be all wrong.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Over the next few months, our country will hear little agreement between the presidential candidates. Some might be surprised to hear any, but I guarantee you will; because even in the most divisive times, there is at least one claim that cuts across both sides of the aisle: We must support our troops.
The military remains one of the most trusted public institutions in America. Both former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have chosen post-9/11 veterans as running mates, in part, to tap into this trust. Unfortunately, signals and rhetoric are not enough to protect our all-volunteer force from the threat it is currently facing.
Last year, the U.S. military missed its annual enlistment goals by about 41,000 recruits. Following this second straight year of shortfall, acting Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Ashish Vazirani testified before Congress that "the all-volunteer force faces one of its greatest challenges since inception."
Some services have taken bold steps to address the issue like raising the maximum enlistment age and accepting recruits without a high school diploma or GED for the first time in over two decades. The Pentagon has partnered with think tanks, academia, advertisers, as well as a select group of corporate and nonprofit partners, to rebuild motivation for service, but true change is going to require a more robust "whole of nation" approach.
Unfortunately, military service is no longer a likely or natural path for young people. Last March, Under Secretary of the Army Gabe Camarillo testified before Congress that 75 percent of young Americans have little to no knowledge about the Army, and only 9 percent have the propensity to serve, the lowest it has been in over a decade.
We must be careful here not to conflate the word "propensity" with "willingness." Propensity is closer to the word "tendency," a natural inclination to do something. Military service may no longer be a natural path for young people, but this does not mean young people are not willing to serve. In fact, I see the opposite in today's youth just like we did in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
Their ways of interacting with the world may look different from prior generations, but as ever, young Americans are seeking purpose, authenticity, connection and community in a divided world. According to a recent Gallup survey, they are especially seeking these things as they enter the workforce.
Young people want an employer that cares about their development and is rooted in purpose? I can think of few organizations better suited to the task than the U.S. military.
The alignment is clear. Where we are falling short is the approach. There is massive untapped potential in the private sector that can accelerate real change if the public sector once again brings them to the table. Indeed, it was public-private partnerships that helped reduce post-9/11 veteran unemployment from 12 percent in 2011 to less than 3 percent in 2023. What if we saw young people's propensity to serve increase by the same factor, or even greater?
Corporations are among the greatest benefactors of a strong, self-sustaining military, and for years now, they've been filling their own ranks with the top-notch veteran talent that emerges from it. They not only have the resources to reach more young people; they have the role models.
First, the public sector should view more businesses as allies and empower them to do what they do best: Sell products and market ideas. The product is national service, and the most authentic storytellers you can find are already there in companies, now serving as corporate volunteers alongside nonprofits throughout the country.
By tapping into veteran employee resource groups and service organizations, as well as the nearly 2.5 million veteran-owned small businesses in America, we can connect young people in a positive way with leaders who have served. This will directly counter the popular narrative of the "broken veteran" and instead showcase the strengths and sense of community that come from military service.
The majority of veterans are not broken. We served, and we are thriving in every sector, including elected office. Our next commander in chief, with a veteran by their side, should trumpet this message too.
It will take a whole of nation approach today to recruit the force of tomorrow. Whether we are reaching across sectors or across the aisle, we must unite on this front and move forward together.
Kevin Schmiegel, a retired Marine Lieutenant Colonel, is currently the CEO of a service disabled Veteran owned business called ZeroMils. He previously led three national military nonprofits.
Tags
Who is online
425 visitors
So, what's the solution? Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in classrooms? Emphasizing America's martial history? Gun education in public schools? A new marketing campaign?
Let's ignore that the US military hasn't won a war for 80 years. Let's ignore that the US military can't defend our borders against hoards of migrants illegally invading the country. Let's ignore that the US military couldn't defend cities against violent uprisings or the Capitol from insurrectionists. Let's ignore that political government uses soldiers as pawns to score political points. Let's ignore the suicide rate among veterans. Let's ignore how many have been sent to die on pointless hills defending political slogans. Let's ignore the maimed and scarred whose lifelong sacrifice has been rewarded with a 'thank you for your service'. But, hey, at least you get to claim a smug superiority over mere citizens.
I think this shows the Democrats support:
They are responsible for the deaths of 13 Servicemembers and 200 Afghani and just had their lackies write a statement.
Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’
Donald Trump has repeatedly denigrated U.S. military service members
Trump says civilian Medal of Freedom is 'much better' than Medal of Honor
Trump cancels WW1 memorial at U.S. cemetery in France due to rain
John Kelly confirms Trump privately disparaged U.S. service members and veterans
6 times Trump insulted US veterans
New York Times: Daughters of foot doctor say he diagnosed Trump with bone spurs as ‘favor’ to Fred Trump
is that all ?
Still pushing false nonsense I see.
Nope, got tired of cutting and pasting.
Wow, okay. Hard to argue against all that evidence you provided...
Which, since he has said and done most all of this stuff in public?
Actually, I'm still trying to figure out what anything you said has any bearing on my comment. The conclusion I come to is that its just another "but Trruuummmmppppp" comment with of no value.
Which comment?
The original one with a NY Post ling congratulating Trump for finally going to Arlington National Cemetery, and demeaning Biden for not being there? Which I responded with articles quoting Trump demeaning service members and veterans.
That one has bearing.
Or the one where you claimed by linked news articles were false nonsense, despite there being witnesses and even video or Trump making those comments?
If you don't want Trump quoted in the comments, you shouldn't be commenting in an article about Trump.
I'm sure that, with some help, you can figure it out. When you do, let me know.
So once again you have nothing to back up anything you say and settle for simple trolling.