The US Army discovers woke doesn't win wars — but is it too late?
By: nypost (New York Post)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Are the powers that be planning a war?
The US Army last week "released a recruitment ad that critics argue is a sure sign the military is gearing up for war," Townhall's Leah Barkoukis reports. "There are no signs of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the 30-second spot, which features white males jumping out of a plane."
After several years of stressing wokeness and diversity — and telling troops, "If you're a white male, you are part of the problem" — the Army is suddenly seeking old-fashioned soldiers from traditional sources.
That's because, like it or not, if you're looking for combat soldiers, you're going to be recruiting heavily among white males — and, worse yet from the wokies' standpoint, white males from the South and Midwest.
Though the Army has become more diverse overall, historically it's been white males who have disproportionately signed up for combat roles.
This remains true enough that the Army has been worrying about it for a while, though mostly in terms of its impact on the promotion of minority and female officers, since senior leadership comes largely from combat or "tactical" commands.
The United States is involved, though not yet with substantial troops, in three theaters: Ukraine, China/Taiwan/the Philippines and the Middle East.
The US Army recently released a recruiting ad that didn't emphasize diversity or inclusion.Ron Adar/TheNEWS2 via ZUMA Press Wire
It's looking more likely at least one of these will turn into a hot war for America. So there's a bigger reason for urgency.
The question is: Will the ads work?
White males from the South and Midwest have been more likely to sign up because of traditions of patriotism and masculinity that haven't been especially welcome in today's military. ("You're part of the problem" is poor salesmanship.)
Worse yet, the brass has treated the troops who do sign up poorly.
The shameful and dishonest skedaddle from Afghanistan, leaving hundreds of Americans behind, made many serving troops angry.
It also demonstrated to potential recruits that the Army — and the nation's civilian leadership — will praise patriotism and sacrifice when it suits them but flush the results of those sacrifices down the toilet for shallow political reasons.
(In the words of British Adm. Andrew Cunningham in World War II: "It takes the Navy three years to build a ship. It will take 300 years to build a new tradition." Not so much for today's American brass.)
In a functioning military, loyalty runs in both directions. But winning hasn't been a priority lately.
And, of course, the troops' well-being isn't a priority either.
One in eight military families resorts to food banks and community pantries to make ends meet, which isn't likely to add to military service's appeal.
(While soldiers' kids go unfed, the brass has, however, found millions of dollars to support gender transitions for soldiers, because of course.)
A family member who's in the Army has shared numerous stories of filthy, broken-down barracks, unfed troops and uncaring officers.
It was my understanding making sure troops are taken care of is an officer's top priority. Not in practice, it seems.
So we see disrespect for a prime demographic, disloyalty to troops' sacrifices and disregard for their day-to-day well-being.
It's not a formula for successful recruiting.
Maybe the forces will be able to make it up elsewhere.
There's a tradition of black bravery in combat: Just look at the Tuskegee Airmen and the Red Ball Express.
And we've seen brave women in combat, too.
But the Army's new ads suggest that under pressure it's returning to its recruiting roots.
And anyway, the real problem isn't so much the recruiting demographics as the people doing the recruiting.
In recent years our military has shown itself more interested in social issues than in its actual job, which is to deter, defeat and destroy America's enemies.
That's not the fault of the troops — it's the fault of the leaders.
But who wants to sign up to be led by people who don't want to do their jobs?
Politicized militaries don't win wars, and they don't attract fighting soldiers.
Changing that starts at the top, not with TV ads.
Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a professor of law at the University of Tennessee and founder of the InstaPundit.com blog.
No Trump, trolling, or fascist crap
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
561 visitors
Nice promotion...............................
The question in the title has yet to be answered.