Although this might end up in the Pit, I’m hoping for some reasoned discussion instead.
At the Six Flags amusement park west of where Atlanta, the U.S. Army has an attraction called the “Virtual Army Experience”. Teenaged kids get to meet real Green Berets, climb into real Humvees, shoulder replica M-4’s and be immersed in a virtual-reality game where they get to mow down “bad guys” in the streets of a dusty town in some exotic land.
Here are a couple of things that particularly bug me:
I guess their contact information goes into a database of potential recruits; I wonder if they get their birthdates so they’ll automatically be contacted when they turn 17.
What bothers me here is that the kids are being presented with a picture of moral clarity that doesn’t reflect real warfare. The mission is undoubtedly worthy – delivering humanitarian aid supplies – and the people they’ll be killing are unambiguously bad guys.
And even if you have qualms, the bad guys fall down bloodlessly and disappear. You don’t have to see their shattered bodies or smell the blood and shit.
Obviously any X-box war game presents combat as exciting and fun rather than the nightmare it is. That’s fine if it’s a commercial game created strictly for entertainment. I just don’t like seeing my government using such a game to try and attract the next generation of cannon fodder.
I suppose the military has always used some kind of bullshit to get youngsters interested, but doing it in the form of an amusement park attraction seems pretty low.
So, anybody know if this is being done at other sites, and what do you think about it?
Where do you expect us to get soldiers? Would you be happier if the military only enticed children unlike your own?
Soldiering is an honorable profession. If nothing underhanded is being done, then I see no problem at all.
==edited to add==
American soldiers are not cannon fodder. This is a term used to describe undertrained and under-equipped soldiers whose lives are given away cheaply. It is a term of contempt. I am sure your use of it was an oversight.
Actually, it does reflect real warfare. There are two types of people in war: your people, and everybody else. The moral ambiguity comes after you’ve survived. You have to be alive to feel guilty.
It is a traveling show and features a line of action figures based on real Army heroes. (If a guy in my outfit had an action figure based on him, he would never hear the end of it.)
The military is made up of people like me, the guy you went to high school with, lived next door to you and took your sister to the prom. Normal every day men and women. Normal every day men and women go to amusement parks. We are in a recruitment competition with every other business. What is wrong with putting our best foot forward? Where do you want us to get recruits?
So this is the upgraded version of America’s Army? Cool!
I’ll try to hit it when it comes to the Six Flags near me, as the (free!) download takes so. freaking. long. to complete and the article said they were giving away CD based copies.
The military has always done outreach to teen-age (and younger) youth. I don’t see anything more underhanded or more “bullshit” than anything they’ve ever done.
If we want to have a volunteer military, we accept that it will recruit.
Yeah, this whole thing sounds pretty sleazy. The increasing militarization of the culture is very disturbing. It’s disgusting to put M4’s on the shoulders of chidren and encourage them to virtually “kill” those subhuman non-Americans. The OP’s point about the false presentation of moral clarity is right on point. This is fucking Nazi shit.
But the thinking about moral ambiguity is more properly considered before you decide to join the fight. It’s immoral to recruit by lying about moral justification if there isn’t any.
Cannon fodder is not a term used to describe undertrained and under-equipped soldiers. It’s a term for expendable lives sacrificed to achieve an objective. We certainly have soldiers at risk and everyone of them is considered expendable at some level no matter how much the people who sent them into harms way may say otherwise.
Not my problem and I really don’t give a fuck. We could, of course, increase recruitment simply by not initiating and remaining in conflicts which serve no defensive purpose. The military has no problem with recruitment when there’s no danger of getting shipped off to some shithole for no reason and no guarantee you’ll come back when they say you will. There’s also not much problem when a conflict is justified. The solution to the military’s recruitment woes is to get the fuck out of Iraq, not to harrass families at amusement parks
I would rather the miltary didn’t entice any children at all.
Please. You have done your level best to ensure that moral considerations of this type can’t be made by government agencies, as they are properly in the area of individual belief. (Actually, I agree with you there.)
So the government (in the role of the Army) has no business talking about the moral arguments on either side of this. Gets too close to advocacy. I can see it in the schools perhaps, where viewpoints of all kinds can be fleshed out, but i can’t see it in recruitment.
Let the Army and the other branches make their pitch, and parents and churches and other influential people can make theirs.
Careful not to overbalance and fall off your high horse their.
If you had bothered to read the article you would have seen that it was an attraction that people lined up for. If you were interested, you got in line, if not - you went to go get a picture taken with Bugs and Daffy.
Not an oversight, no. American soldiers are being used as cannon fodder; their lives are being wasted by the country they bravely volunteered to serve. The contempt comes from their unworthy Commander in Chief, not from me.
That is an interesting observation, and a pointless one at that. Who would have thought that a military has an easier time recruiting people when there is no possibility of sending those people to war?
The military is not now, nor has it ever been, a jobs program. That people acquire skills and are provided funding for further education is entirely ancillary to the mission of the military: to fight and win wars.
The hell it’s not. Why don’t you just call them stupid while you’re at it? We may make our own jokes about the bleakness of the situations we may be in, but it is not your place to do so. I know you served, and I know you know what I’m talking about, so for the life of me I will never understand how you can blatantly misrepresent the military with some of the things you say.
I’m kinda not OK with recruiting by presenting war as entertainment in an entertainment venue.
It’s a legitimate career choice, so I’m cool with them recruiting in the career centers of high schools and college campuses. Of course recruiting drives are OK on patriotic holidays and on military-relations festivals that sometimes happen around military bases. Some people conflate the war against terror with religious crusading, so I’m baffled why pro-war churches don’t invite the Army to come recruite on Sundays following services (probably because they hope someone’s elses children will fight the war). But definitely it is not OK to present war as risk-free entertainment in order to sign kids up to fight.