How Veterans Contribute to Elite Schools: Real World Perspective

from the LA Times:

U.S. Marines, Stanford University: Stanford's Marines bring real world perspective to elite campus

On his first day as a student at Stanford University after serving as an enlisted Marine in Iraq, William Treseder rushed to get to the dining hall by 6 a.m.

Stanford dining halls, it turned out, open in the morning at the same time that Marine chow halls close: 8 a.m.

"That was the beginning of understanding of what a different place this is," said Treseder, now 28 and just a few classes away from graduating with a degree in science, technology and society.

Soon he found that Stanford students — bright, hardworking and focused on their careers — were not necessarily anti-military, just ignorant of military service and their generational cohorts who have enlisted. [ . . . ]

Along with his studies, Treseder has become an unofficial leader of a small group of students who have made the same journey: Marine grunts who are now undergraduates at an elite university. [10 veterans including seven Marines of whom six served in Iraq or Afghanistan; two including Treseder served in both. . . . ]

The Marines at Stanford know they are getting a top-notch education. The school has provided financial support so they do not have to drain their veterans' benefits or be burdened by student loans.

Still, they never lose sight of the fact that they are different from other students. An estimated 90% of undergraduates are "traditional" students who arrived at Stanford directly from high school. Most Marines are community college transfers. [ . . . ]

Some students assume that because the Marines have deployed to war zones, they are experts on U.S. foreign policy and cheerleaders for the current strategy. "You try to get into a serious discussion and all you hear is Abu Ghraib, civilian casualties and drone strikes," Treseder said. [ . . . ]

[Chris Clark, 25, who served two tours with a reconnaissance unit in Iraq, received a Combat Action Ribbon and a Purple Heart. Now he's a political science major.] Clark is studying with Condoleezza Rice, former secretary of State and now a political science professor at Stanford. He was in her seminar "Challenges and Dilemmas in Foreign Policy."

Rice favors veterans for her classes: "I've seen first-hand how veterans can elevate and inform classroom discussions because of their real-life experiences.'' [ . . . ]

OYE Comment:

Veterans, ROTC and military service all add to the diversity of the student body, an important part of the undergraduate experience.

And maybe some of Stanford's traditional college students will be inspired to Be A Man! Enlist!

Perceived Overuse of a Compliment

Thoughts from a Paratrooper.

Like many veterans, I’ve been called a hero for my military service. As I see it, I didn’t accomplish anything extraordinary during my time in the Army or my two tours in Iraq. I did my job. I had good days and I had bad days. Yes, on really bad days things were nasty and might involve multiple fiery explosions or being under severely oppressive heat for hours, wearing a full kit. Despite these hardships, I tried, generally, to do as good a job as I could while serving, and I left military service honorably. Even though I didn’t participate in any solitary acts of heroism, like jumping on a grenade or being the guy who got Osama bin Laden, there are many who would say I am a hero for doing what others would not while putting myself at extreme risk.

I understand the sentiment, and I trust that there are those who truly believe that all service members are heroes, simply for signing up. But I can’t help think that for some, “hero” is a throw-away word, designed to demonstrate a “support the troops” position or guarantee applause at an event.

Cheney Brigades: A Great Idea

from Doug Bandow on Huffington Post:

The Cheney Brigades: A Second Chance for War Advocates to Fight

[ . . . ] Yet the strongest proponents of today's wars usually are people who haven't served in the military, let alone in combat. Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama fought in no conflicts but together started four wars. And that number would be more if expanding the mission in Somalia, undertaking military operations in Bosnia, and threatening to invade Haiti, all undertaken by Clinton, also counted. Moreover, President Obama has nearly two years left in just his first term. If he is reelected, he will have another four years to start additional conflicts.

At least President Bush served in the Reserves, though that was at a time when Reserve service was often used to avoid going to Vietnam. President Clinton engaged in a famous effort to get out of the draft while maintaining his "political viability," as he put it at the time. President Obama didn't face conscription and didn't volunteer. [ . . . ]

In retrospect it seems almost tragic that Mr. Cheney was denied the experience that he now is committed to providing to so many other young men and women. After all, he said later that he "would have obviously been happy to serve had" he been called. But by then the military just wasn't interested in recruiting old guys past their prime.

It doesn't seem fair to him or the rest of us. Mr. Cheney should have had his chance to go to war.

My friend and colleague Ted Galen Carpenter suggests creating a system of conscription based on implied consent. Favor launching more than one war every five years and you get drafted into the armed services, proposes Ted. Since we are all living longer, he advocates raising the eligibility age to 50.

But the idea of a draft seems so, well, ugly. Service should be forced, since people, like Mr. Cheney, often don't recognize what is good for them in time, but it would be better to give the system an upbeat name, such as the Military Extended Service Opportunity. That sounds too bureaucratic, however. It is a noble enterprise, creating "second chance brigades" for those who found themselves too busy promoting wars to serve in them when they were young. Congress might want to name the program after a figure who inspires us all -- giving honor where honor is due, you might say -- and call them the Cheney Brigades.

Eligibility also should be as broad as possible. It is true that age no longer is such a stiff bar to service: up to 50 and you should go into the field. Up to 70 you could staff the headquarters, helping with paperwork, if nothing else.

But advocating a war every five years, as Ted Carpenter proposes, doesn't cover nearly enough warrior wannabes. Indeed, we should be able to meet all our military personnel needs and more through MESO. A person should be called up for service in a Cheney Brigade if he or she has not previously served in the armed forces and has:

• supported any war which manifestly had no possible, plausible, or conceivable relationship to American security, such as World War I, Grenada, Panama, Somalia, Kosovo, or Libya;

• advocated going to war "for democracy," to "spread democracy," or to "make the world safe for democracy," as in World War I;

• urged intervening or extending intervention to reconstitute a central government, rebuild a nation, or remake a society, as in Somalia, Iraq, and Afghanistan;

• promoted "mission creep" in a military operation originally sold as limited or not even a real war, such as Somalia and Libya;

• promised that invading another nation or overthrowing another regime would be a "cakewalk" or otherwise simple, short, easy, and quick, as in Iraq and Libya;

• pushed for a war using lurid but exaggerated or false atrocity stories, as in the Spanish-American War, World War I, Iraq War I, Kosovo, and Libya;

• advanced a militaristic and interventionist foreign policy with thoughtless bromides and clichés, such as "if America doesn't do it, who will," "what's the use of having this wonderful military if we don't use it," "we spent a larger share of the GDP on the military before," "we have vital interests there (and everywhere)," "we have the responsibility since we have the ability," "we must destroy the nation to save it," "all we have to do is cut entitlements," "it's a dangerous world," "defense is in the Constitution," and "kill them all and let God sort them out."

Anyone can make a mistake, so everyone should get one "do-over." But falling into two of the above categories would result in a standard year tour in a Cheney Brigade. Fulfilling three of the forgoing criteria would mean three years of service. And individuals meeting four or more of these factors would receive an extra special five year term -- with at least three years served where bullets are flying or bombs are exploding.

So many war enthusiasts, so many opportunities to go to war. MESO would nicely match individual justice with national needs. [ . . . ]

OYE Comment:

Let's see if the over-the-hill crowd takes advantage of this opportunity.

Bigotry Disguised as Morality

Good on Defense Secretary Gates for ending any conversation of being able to opt-out of the Military because DADT has ended.

"Sir, we joined the Marine Corps because the Marine Corps has a set of standards and values that is better than that of the civilian sector. And we have gone and changed those values and repealed the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy," the sergeant told Gates during the question and answer session.

"We have not given the Marines a chance to decide whether they wish to continue serving under that. Is there going to be an option for those Marines that no longer wish to serve due to the fact their moral values have not changed?" he asked.

"No," Gates responded. "You'll have to complete your ... enlistment just like everybody else."

"The reality is that you don't all agree with each other on your politics, you don't agree with each other on your religion, you don't agree with each other on a lot of things," he added. "But you still serve together. And you work together. And you look out for each other. And that's all that matters."

The Military will be a better place if this Marine leaves once his enlistment is up. And it will be a much better place if this Marine moves beyond these hateful thoughts and and stays in.