Military Recruiters Are Often Treated

Military recruiters are often treated as glorified heroes within American society. To serve our nation in the military is the touted to be the highest form of patriotism. Despite the consistent barrage of jingoism in American the truth about military recruitment is that it is an extremely unregulated and at times unethical practice. As the war in Iraq escalated and the military's needs for fresh recruits continue to rise it appears that recruiters are oftentimes resorting to more underhanded and unethical means to confuse and ultimately deceive youths into signing up for the military. Cindy Sheen's story in Buzzflash news exemplifies the deceptive manner in which military recruiters bring aboard fresh new faces to fight America's battles. Her son signed with the U.S. Army only after the military recruiter promised him not only free college, but also that he would never enter into active combat because of his extremely high military competency. Despite these promises, he not only was sent into combat but did not receive approval for a single college class and was killed in action only five hours after his unit was deployed. The story that Cindy tells is a cautionary tell of the consequences of military recruitment deceit. In the past five years, the military has increased its recruiting budget and have given military recruiters significantly more authority and leeway than every before. The consequences of these actions have had a dramatic effect on the recruiting process. Military recruiters use false promises, confusion, and greed to lure hapless youth into joining the military.

Following 9/11 the need for increased military forces has created a ripple effect in military recruitment. According to the New York Times, the U.S. Army recruitment budget has increased nearly threefold since 9/11, and this has been evidenced by the cohesive advertisement campaign to convince American youths to sign up. Military recruiters are the frontlines of recruitment; they have been given almost complete freedom as long as recruitment is successful. Although not many people are aware of it, recruiters work on a commission basis, which means that the more people they recruit the higher their salary and chance for promotion. Without an overall regulatory body to create active policies, recruiters are not held accountable for what they say to recruit individuals. In the case of Cindy Sheen's son, the military recruiter promised him both a specific role in the military as well as money for his college education. He was promised that he would be an assistant chaplain, but once he reached basic training he was told that the position was filled and he was forced to become a cook. These promises though false still had little real harm; however it is the lure of noncombat duties that brings military recruiters to the realm of unethical behavior. Promises of nonmilitary service during wartime is not an isolated incident, but is actually one of the primary lures by the military to increase enrollment. Thousands of recruits are told that they would be assigned noncombat duty only to be thrust into the heart of the battle. By employing persuasion through appeasement, military recruiters create false hope in recruits and their families and this is not only unethical but extremely unjust.

False promises are used in conjunction with confusing language and enrollment packages to confuse recruits. What military recruiters are not required to do is actually explain the implications of joining the military. Once an individual signs the papers that legally bind him to the military, the binding agreement is only binding to the individual, and not to the government. The implication is that the government at any time does not need to keep promises made during recruitment. Recruiters understand this doctrine and as a result they take severe liberty in providing every sort of guarantee and promises in the hope of confusing families and individuals into signing the documentation. Once a recruit is fully compliant, there is in effect owned by the military, with its own set of laws and procedures that have no democratic or equality appeals attached. Military recruiters never explain this to recruits, but instead confuse them with false hope and with jingoistic logic that pervades their thoughts. Recruiters talk about their duty and patriotism and greatly increase the rationalization of service through American pride centric logic. This confuses recruits and in effect makes them hasten a decision. What is worse is that these recruiters are not even acting against military regulation; they are specifically trained to operate within this manner.

Finally, recruiters use greed as a prime tactic to subtly subvert youths. Within the past five years the military has implemented many bonus policies that offer what appear to be lucrative benefits to enlistees. Rarely however, do recruiters explain the "catch" involved in the supposed bonuses offered. One common deception is the allocation of bonus money. Although military recruiters often tell recruits that they will receive up to thirty thousand in sign up bonuses. However, many such bonuses are contingent on even further service and will require recruits to sign up for five or more years of fulltime service. It is the general disregard for fine print that adds to the deception. By using monetary incentives, these military recruiters are attempting to use greed as the devise to get recruiters hooked into the military. However, general application of resources seldom is given without signing up for even more service time.