Guard recruit from South St. Paul has second thoughts about joining

[kskiska]

A South St. Paul teenager changed his mind after signing up to be in the Minnesota Army National Guard. The Guard says he must file a request to try to get out of his commitment now that he's a soldier.

Randy Furst, Star Tribune

At 17, Leo Valle was dazzled by the money and other perks that came with service in the National Guard. So in March, the South St. Paul resident signed up to join.

He soon had second thoughts.

Valle's parents, who had given their written consent, didn't want him to go. His girlfriend was against it, too. When Valle saw a video about the rigors of basic training, he decided he had made the wrong decision. "I didn't want to do it anymore," he said recently. "They yell in your face and you take orders."

When he didn't show on the day he was scheduled to ship out for basic training in mid-June, the Guard came knocking at his front door. Valle and the Guard have been engaged in a standoff ever since.

more…
http://www.startribune.com/462/story/541805.html

[sutz12]

1. Hidden motives.....

"I didn't want to do it anymore," he said recently. "They yell in your face and you take orders."

Not to mention that whole, "when you get to Iraq they shoot at you" thing. :rofl:

[demosincebirth]

14. The second day in Basic training I had the same feeling... along

with 90% of my platoon. Thats life, you make decisions and you have to live with 'em.

We used to have TS cards (back in the fifties). Anytime you really didn't like something about the Army, you could take your card to your platoon Sergeant and he would punch it for you. If you were gullible enough you would do it.

TS meant; Tough Shit.

[BOSSHOG]

2. I don't know what the lads motives are

but I went to basic training in 72 and yes there was a lot of shouting and in your face stuff, but basic was the easiest nine weeks of my life. You just keep your mouth shut and do what you are told. You don't have to make any decisions for yourself; your every 24 hour period is planned for you.

[larrysh]

10. It seemed bad at the time I was there (1971), but

After the first three weeks or so, the only people in our platoon who were being ridden hard were the duds...ane a month in Ft. Polk's
"Motivation Platoon" generally solved that. "Moto Platoon" had many ingenious ways to convince someone to pull their head out of their a--.
Thank god I never had to go!

[BOSSHOG]

12. I went to Navy Boot in San Diego

We were told there was three ways we could escape; over this fence and you'll get killed on the interstate; over that fence and you'll drown in the harbor or over that fence and you'll be in Marine Boot Camp, they'll give you back to us in about a month. Bootcamp was a breeze. Hell we were even told when we had to write a letter home.

[MindPilot]

19. Now see, that's exactly the part I hated so boot was the WORST for me

I went in at 17 and the toughest adjustment was having everything down to the tiniest little detail planned and scripted. I never really did adjust to that idea and over thirty years later I still haven't.

And boot camp Company Commanders, I think we called them, were a bunch of sadistic bastards. Fortunately I stayed under the radar most of the time, but some of the abuses I witnessed were pretty terrifying. I sometimes thought the guys who were in the Navy instead of jail had made a bad decision.

[pokercat999]

25. My basic started Mar 72, Ft Dix, NJ where were you?

[Kutjara]

3. This reads like an article from The Onion.

"They yell in your face and you take orders." Well, duh! Hasn't this kid ever seen 'An Officer and a Gentleman' or just about any rights-of-passage bootcamp movie from the last fifty years? And his parents signed their consent and then decided they were against him going. What woke them up?

His reasons for not wanting to go would be hilarious if they weren't so sad. Someone should let him know that basic training will seem like a luxury holiday camp compared to a tour of duty in Iraq.

Honestly, I'm surprised he can't get out on the grounds of mental incapacity.

[ET Awful]

4. "They yell in your face and you take orders."

No shit? I thought they played badminton between etiquette class and tea time.

[pokercat999]

26. Tea time is only in the Texas Air National Guard....nt

[MADem]

5. This kid is an IDIOT, but the odds are he will be able to void the

contract. He was under age when he signed it, AND his parents will be able to attest they didn't understand what they were signing:

He and his parents are legal immigrants from El Salvador and his parents speak little English and can't read it.

His father, Leonidas Valle, said he could not read what he was signing and never talked to the recruiters.

...Asked about the parents' inability to read what they signed, Olson said: "I can't speak for the parents. It is incumbent that the parents seek counsel if they cannot read the contract. Come on. It would be a pretty important document to sign."

...In the meantime, Valle started having doubts, reinforced by the basic training video. "I follow the law, but I don't like to take too many orders," he said.

This kid is an IDIOT, IMO. He whines about taking orders not once, but twice. What, if they made him a general on his first day, would he then be happy??

That said, after a bit of back and forth, they'll let this little shit off the hook. And just as well, he's not reliable. He'd just end up as a "low quality recruit" statistic after we spent several tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars on him. And his selfish attitude would probably end up getting some other poor mama's sons killed.

[MichiganVote]

7. Yeah...like beggers can afford to be choosy. For Pete's sake, he's 17

A "low quality recruit"???? What 17 year old isn't a 'low quality recruit'? He's not an idiot, he's a kid who did just what the US wanted him to do...get dazzled by the bait of the military, sign his life away, and then thought better of it. Not having gone to boot camp as yet they'll let him go rather than waste the time and money to train him.

Let's lighten up.

[MADem]

13. Well, he is. Plenty of kids have maturity at that age, this one didn't

The recruiter also clearly took a shortcut by not sitting down with the parents and personally ensuring that THEY knew what they were signing. That's the thing that will resolve this issue quickly...that lousy little shortcut.

I went to boot camp with a couple of youngsters who needed parental consent to join. They were motivated, though, from families that had a tradition of service, and they did fine. One went on to get a commission later down the line and ended up working for me.

Look, there's no draft yet. That kid had opportunity after opportunity after opportunity to WALK AWAY. But instead, he interviewed, he pretested, he tested, he physicalled, he took up a hundred hours of recruiter time in paperwork, background checks, getting certified copies of birth certificates, diplomas, transcripts, and so on, Delayed Entry meetings, he was slotted into a job downstream, and a boot camp slot, and now, because he whines and changes his mind--when he could have WALKED AWAY IN THE FIRST PLACE, all that shit is flushed.

That kid cost the American taxpayers close to five grand with his little "stunt." He wasted the recruiter's time. Perhaps if the focus was on quality rather than quantity this might not have happened. But it took two--the recruiter and the kid--to tango.

And WE pay for it.

I don't feel sorry for that kid. I think he's an asshole for wanting to be Rambo in the first place.

[demosincebirth]

16. If it was up to me, I'd have all 17 and 18 year olds in, at least

a 6 month tour. I joined, and I know, that I came out a better person.

[MADem]

18. I think a kid should be 21 before signing up, actually

Or they'd better move the drinking age down for servicemembers. I think it's just absurd that a kid cannot legally have champagne at his wedding before he goes overseas and comes home in an aluminum box.

If they can't see their way to that, then they should not permit kids under 21 to be deployed to any overseas billets. Shore duty, stateside ONLY. That would solve some of these issues...

[demosincebirth]

23. I don't know about now, but when I was in, there was no drinking

age for G.I.s on post. Off base was a different story.


Your post: "If they can't see their way to that, then they should not permit kids under 21 to be deployed to any overseas billets. Shore duty, stateside ONLY. That would solve some of these issues..."

That definitely would not work. Enlistees could pick and choose where they didn't want to go? It would defeat the military concept of Order and Discipline.

[MADem]

24. That went by the wayside some years ago

While the states were transitioning from eighteen to twenty one year old drinking, there was a period of time when either rules were not enforced, or, in some localities, kids under 21 could drink that panther piss near beer at the base club.

It's only been in the last decade that they began to, and finally have, addressed the issue of overseas assignments (UK, Germany, e.g.). The bottom line is, don't get caught, because they can nail you for it, despite the laws of the country (same goes with prostitution; illegal even in locales where it is legal).

As for my point about age, you aren't looking at the full picture. Many civilized countries think eighteen year old kids are CHILD SOLDIERS--the UN goes with a minimum age of eighteen only because we griped and so did the Brits.

You take an eighteen year old kid, you enlist him for a contract totalling eight years. If he gets any decent school at all that increases his active duty obligation, so figure you have him for six years active, more if you stop-loss, even if he decides not to reenlist. Eight weeks of boot camp, six months to a year of specialty school, a month of leave, a week or two of transit...the kid is on his way to being 20 before ya know it. He does a short two year tour stateside, guarding the gate, learning military courtesies, doing a little measured combat training, or whatever, and then he's off to the sandbox...right when he's of legal drinking age, it's off to a land where US Forces' use of alcohol is proscribed and UCMJ-punishable....~~!

Once they turn 21, they're deployable, that's all I'm saying. Before 21, I think they're too damn young. I would like to see DOD make the investment in time, and see what happens to quality. I'll bet it would skyrocket.

[pokercat999]

27. I don't think children (kids) should be in the military at all.

45 or 50 should be the minimum age, we'd have a lot fewer wars.

[MADem]

35. Well, I'd like wars to be settled with a couple of rounds of chess,

some arm wrassling, and a few rounds of paper, rock, scissors, but in reality, we'd have to get EVERYONE to go along with that scenario. For some reason I think that pompadoured dweeb (the one in North Korea, that is) won't go along with the program...!

So for the near term, we'll have to have youngsters to do the dirty work and the heaving lifting. But I'd like them to be at least 21....

[AndyTiedye]

36. Jason Tharp Joined, & Drowned in the Pool During "Water Survival Training"

surrounded by no less than six swimming instructors. A TV news crew
filmed a drill instructor abusing Tharp the day before.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6988854/

The military is not for everyone.

[MichiganVote]

20. Ok , well sounds like your mind is made up.

[greccogirl]

32. I agree - he doesn't need

to be in the military anyway if he is surprised by "being yelled at and taking orders". They'll probably let him out though.

[gratuitous]

6. Can we try not to be too hard on the 17-year-old?

Now, I know that most of the brilliant points of incandescence who post here at DU were full-fledged geniuses at the age of 17, as was I. We knew everything there was to know about everything, and held fully-formed opinions that were good and proper and right, and that have not needed any maturing or seasoning over the intervening years.

But, astonishingly enough, there are some 17-year-olds walking free in our society who don't have much more sense than God gave a possum. They can be gulled by a slick-talking recruiter, have their heads turned by a flashy promotional video, and some of them (it's true, I tell you) will even believe a lie told right to their face.

It's difficult for us to fathom, having never, ever made a mistake, or done something that we later regret, but some 17-year-olds will even sign a contract without fully reading it, understanding it, or thinking through all its implications.

[MichiganVote]

8. I was a god awful genius at 17. Its all been downhill since.

[LostinVA]

9. IMO, 17-year-olds shouldn't be allowed to join up

Even with parental permission. Even if they've graduated from HS. Good god -- that's a year older than my nephew... he's a smart, good kid, but he's still an idiot about alot of stuff. They aren't an adult, thus the contract shouldn't stand.

[MADem]

15. I actually agree with that sentiment

They sign them up to ensure that they can ship 'em quick, right out of high school, and plug them into the "slow months" at boot camps (Christmas and Turkey day are slow, no one wants to go at that time, but if it's a year away, one doesn't think about it). It's all to keep the pipeline going and their recruit quality mix on the plus side.

The 17 year old DEPS tend to be category ones and twos; the smarter kids. They like to have them "in the bag" so that way they have a good mix in terms of brains coming from each recruiting command (they are goaled for brains, race, gender, and even occasionally, language skills).

The contract won't stand. It never does. I've seen hundreds of these cases, they always let the kid walk, at least in a non-draft environment. They just make a stink to stop others from changing their minds lightly.

This kind of stuff costs a fortune--we waste a lot of money on failures-to-ship.

[LostinVA]

22. I'm glad to hear they don't usual;ly stand

If a kid can't legally sign any other type of contract, why should this be any different?

Interesting to hear about why they sign them...

[superconnected]

11. IMO If it's a volunteer army then they should be able to choose

to leave anytime they want.

Sure they're breaking a contract, but everyone else is breaking marriage contracts (agreed to life term), and any other kind of contract.

I don't want to hear from some divorced hypocrite telling us someone signed the soldier contract and *gulp* ought to do it for their country.

If it's a free army, then make it one all they way.

[MADem]

17. It's not a FREE army, it ain't McDonalds

You volunteer to serve a set period of time. If you don't like the contract, you don't sign it. But once you do, that's it. You're in. Underage DEPS excepted.

It costs anywhere from $28K (basic only, no appreciable follow-on training) on UP to over a million (aviators) to train a servicemember. That's OUR tax dollars. Under your scenario, the Pentagon would need triple its budget for personnel expenditures alone, and they'd likely retain one-fourth of the Army they have with that figure.

I think enough of my tax dollars are wasted by those guys. Let's not make it worse.

[superconnected]

28. I meant volunteer army.

As far as pay, marriage cost money too.

It's a contract too.

Since every other contract can be broken in the US, I'm for the military one to be broken to.

They can just have to pay back any fees occured.

[MADem]

34. When a marriage breaks up, it isn't a taxpayer burdern though

When two people break up, it's their agony, their expense. The lawyers smile.

We spend MILLIONS of dollars on recruits who wash out, either prior to going to boot camp, in boot camp, in advanced training, and within the first two years of accession (these are defined as LOW QUALITY RECRUITS, fwiw). It's our tax dollars at work...or not at work. That wasted money could be used elsewhere (social security, the VA, AFDC, a host of assistance programs); so I find your enthusiam towards tossing our money down the drain kind of unusual.

It's not like we haven't done the studies and don't know what the deal is. Success in service can be predicted based on age, ASVAB score, total amount of education, criminal record, and a host of other factors. Sure, there are exceptions that prove the rule, but the closer we stick to the high quality paradigm, the fewer washouts occur. We KNOW this. But what we are doing right now is scraping the bottom of the barrel. People are disinclined to enlist, so the standards are slipping to maintain the AVF fiction. What they're doing right now is enlisting a lot of kids who really have run out of options, and likely would not have qualified in the picky 90's.

[jody]

31. I agree with you. In the U.S. right to life is inalienable and no one can

sign a contract allowing them self to become a slave except naive teen agers can sign a contract allowing them self to become a slave.

Every contract but an enlistment contract can be broken even though the party breaking the contract may have to pay damages.

For military personnel, if they decide an order places them at too great a risk then they can be punished. In the U.S. military, someone can be executed for refusing to obey an order that places them at great risk of being killed in combat, i.e. a soldier can be killed for refusing to die. :shrug:

[uppityperson]

21. Immigrants should have special screening before enlisting

Where they come from, what country, can have a big impact on what they think they are getting into. Not being able to read the forms doesn't help either (parents). They need special screening, not faster signing up.

[MrSlayer]

29. Welcome to the real world buddy.

What did this dude think? That it was some sort of lark? You signed up bud, you have to serve.

[IndianaGreen]

30. Tell the Guard he is gay!

Heck, I'll even vouch for him being gay!

I would perjure myself to save a life, and if I can save one 17-year from becoming canon fodder in one of Bush's war, it would be the righteous thing to do.

[truthisfreedom]

33. i think this should be on the front of every newspaper. i think we need to

stop turning naive and uninformed children into cannon fodder... that's totally criminal.