Army grad denied shot at NFL

[Rockyn]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/nfl/07/23/army.ap/index.html?cnn=yes

DETROIT (AP) -- Caleb Campbell will not get a chance to play for the Detroit Lions because of a change in military policy.

Campbell was a seventh-round draft pick for the Lions in April. At the time, Army policy would have allowed the West Point graduate to serve as a recruiter if he made the team.

But a subsequent Department of Defense policy has superseded the 2005 Army policy.

In a letter to Lions president Matt Millen dated Wednesday, U.S. Army Lt. Col. Jonathan P. Liba wrote that Campbell has been ordered to give up professional football for "full-time traditional military duties."

Liba wrote that 2nd Lt. Campbell may ask to be released from his active duty obligations in May 2010.

What kind of chicken-**** is that?

[Ace Matherton]

It sucks and they never should have let him into the NFL draft if that was the case but...........when you enlist you lose the right to make your own choices Campbell (probably did) and the Lions should have known that.

[Peter Proud]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/nfl/07/23/army.ap/index.html?cnn=yes



What kind of chicken-**** is that?

You don't just apply to West Point....you are appointed. The tuition is entirely paid for the cadets. In order to attend you enlist and agree to serve a certain number of years after graduation.

[rathman53]

You don't just apply to West Point....you are appointed. The tuition is entirely paid for the cadets. In order to attend you enlist and agree to serve a certain number of years after graduation.

True but if he can pay back the ridculous tution cost. On the spot, then I say why not? If not then you have fullfill your commitment.But you have to know that you are signing your life away when you do this....

[Mr Spoons]

and now he wants out? boohooo.

Nothing in that interview says he's trying to challenge the Army decision. In the interview when he was drafted, he said he would have gone and served wherever had he not been drafted, but the guideline about being a recruiter if he made the team etc meant he could try to play in the NFL.

From: http://www.nypost.com/seven/04292008/sports/armys_caleb_campbell_marches_into_nfl_108705.htm

"It's a win-win situation,'' Campbell said. "If football doesn't work out, I get to do what I came to the Academy for: I get to be an officer, and that's something I love as well."

[Rockyn]

and now he wants out? boohooo.

No where does it say he wants out. As the article states he could have served as a recruiter. It just claims that new policy will prevent him from it. The military could make an exception in his circumstance.

[SB49er4life]

That's fine, but why did the Army wait until AFTER the combine, work-outs, draft and summer ball to let him know all this ???

I have respect for all the men and women out there serving our country, but military/government are absolutely sleezy when it comes down to it.

I've heard way too many horror stories about people getting seriously injured and the military just basically kicking them to the curb and holding medical expenses over their head.

[Ace Matherton]

True but if he can pay back the ridculous tution cost. On the spot, then I say why not?

Because they trained HIM, and no matter how much money he can give them he cant replace himself.

[SB49er4life]

Because they trained HIM, and no matter how much money he can give them he cant replace himself.

Ya, because the government doesn't care about the money... they care about an experienced body they can waste.

[Rockyn]

Don't get me wrong, he made a commitment and should uphold it...but he SHOULD have been able to do as a recruiter, and the military should have handled this months ago. It's also not fair to the Lions. I mean not to argue that any 7th round pick can come in and be a Marques Colston, but it is still a pick they might have put use to.

I salute the kid though and admire his love for his country.

[Peter Proud]

That's fine, but why did the Army wait until AFTER the combine, work-outs, draft and summer ball to let him know all this ???

A different policy was institued by a higher authority...after the fact.

As in any business, policies can't always be written that address every individual's particular situation (health care options that employers provide is a classic case). Usually companies/business try to figure out an agreeable solution once the problem is identified.

Since appointments to West Point and the other Military Academys are given out by Congressional Representatives I would guess that the cadet's congressman is already aware of the situation and will shortly introduce legistlation to correct the situation.

These are very typical things handled by your local congress person's office/staff. Social Security claims, passport issues, pardons, etc.

Expect that this issue is not over and you will see something about it changed.

[Alti50]

its always that **** government...the man's always keepin us down

[Hobbes2d]

David Robinson served. So should Campbell. He knew what he was getting into, and I doubt he's *****ing about it. Nor should anyone here.

[Tracker]

When you enlist you are property of the US government.
Don’t like it? Don’t enlist.

[bruin4life]

David Robinson served. So should Campbell. He knew what he was getting into, and I doubt he's *****ing about it. Nor should anyone here.

Didn't Staubach serve prior to playing too.

[SB49er4life]

When you enlist you are property of the US government.
Don’t like it? Don’t enlist.

I don't think anyone is questioning why the gov't would hold him to what he signed for, but rather the piss poor manner they have gone about handling it.

But if you look at my last post and how I feel... plays perfectly into your last line.

[the snowman]

we need soldiers that wanna fight...not force a bunch of kids into battle...thus all the "friendly fire"tradegies.....some of these kids arent train properly and some are just immature..

[BigB_85]

Lame. It doesn't seem appropriate for the army to let Camplell to follow through with pre-draft workouts, mini-camp, etc., but not actually play. I'd like him to fight the decision in court, but then again he claims to love serving, so he should do what he wants.

[bruin4life]

First off if the original policy went into effect in 2005 he didn't enlist at the Academy with the option to serve as a recruiter while playing pro ball anyways so the new policy doesn't really effect him going by the day he would have graduated high school and enlisted.

Secondly he's a 7th round pick, unlikely he would have made most teams from the 7th round to begin with so to debate about him actually playing is rather pointless. It's a matter of time before he'd likely be cut and have to serve anyways. To quote Martin Lawrence "what the problem is".

[krnbanguboi]

we need soldiers that wanna fight...not force a bunch of kids into battle...thus all the "friendly fire"tradegies.....some of these kids arent train properly and some are just immature..

Honestly, if you listen to some interviews of war vets after experiencing years or months in war they wanted to get the hell back home. Green soldiers [new recuits or soldiers new to real live combat] want to fight. I do not want soldiers that "want to fight" or kill. I want soldiers who hate war but still fight to defend this country.

[bruin4life]

Honestly, if you listen to some interviews of war vets after experiencing years or months in war they wanted to get the hell back home. Green soldiers [new recuits or soldiers new to real live combat] want to fight. I do not want soldiers that "want to fight" or kill. I want soldiers who hate war but still fight to defend this country.

Agreed.

[Fricker 4]

Hmmm Officer in Military or playing for the Lions, only see 1 way to win there.

[MR. WEBBER]

this is lame for the military. they see someone made it past their policy so they revamp it so he cant play. watch the movie "stop-loss" then you can see how f--ked up our gov. is. the military could have made itself look so good by letting him play if he made the team, but now they are looking like complete a-holes by redoing this policy AFTER! he gets a chance to make a team.

[BigBensAngel7]

this is lame for the military. they see someone made it past their policy so they revamp it so he cant play. watch the movie "stop-loss" then you can see how f--ked up our gov. is. the military could have made itself look so good by letting him play if he made the team, but now they are looking like complete a-holes by redoing this policy AFTER! he gets a chance to make a team.

i agree. but there were some that thought it was unfair. even if they wanted to change the policy, why wait so long in doing so? there are plenty of movies that make you think how screwed up our and other governments are.. example V for Vendetta, that really makes you think about what could happen.

[bruin4life]

this is lame for the military. they see someone made it past their policy so they revamp it so he cant play.

Yeah but the policy was put into place in 2005 AFTER his freshamn year so people don't see a problem with them changing it so he would have been able to play so for them to change it back so he has to serve first should not be an issue.

Bottomline is that the policy shouldn't have been made, imo. You're training these guys to be part of a unit then all of a sudden you're going to say that someone in the unit can be treated differently than the unit. You really undermine alot of the teachings that you had installed in them.

[sandiegojoe]

the military is wrong on this one. You don't get someone to commit to their future and then screw up their plans after the fact. They should have some kind of common sense appeal process.

[the snowman]

Honestly, if you listen to some interviews of war vets after experiencing years or months in war they wanted to get the hell back home. Green soldiers [new recuits or soldiers new to real live combat] want to fight. I do not want soldiers that "want to fight" or kill. I want soldiers who hate war but still fight to defend this country.

thats what i was going for but you said it better

[ASmith4ever]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/nfl/07/23/army.ap/index.html?cnn=yes



What kind of chicken-**** is that?

Here is some insight for those of you that are less informed.

They didn't "wait" until after the draft to make the decision. The decision was being reviewed (not just for Campbell, but all newly commissioned Lieutenants) and the final interpreation of it was decided AFTER the draft, thus affecting his status.

I am currently a Second Lieutenant in the United States Army and the way I see it, Campbell has little issue with this in the first place. You don't take an appointment to an academy or even contract with an ROTC program unless being in the Army and leading soldiers is your NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. If it isn't, than you are the one who made the bad decision.

A lot of people have been joining the Army (or other service) lately because it pays for a college education and that is the WRONG answer. These are the same people (LT Watada for example) that complaing and ***** when they have to deploy. Here's an idea.. DON'T JOIN THE ****ING MILITARY!!!

The Army needs officers and, more importantly, officers that have a passion for leading soldiers in both garrison and combat environments. The article says that instead of playing in the NFL in the next few weeks, he'll be deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq instead, which is complete bull****. His training is not complete. Upon commissioning, all new Lietenants must complete Basic Officer Leadership Course (BOLC) II and III, which takes anywhere from 6 months to a year depending on your branch.

Earlier this year, before I commissioned, I mentored a yound lady who had a bad attitude and pretty much enlisted in the military without thinking through the consequences and now she is doing everything she can to get discharged after less than 6 months. Is this the Army's fault too? Because it is actually a very similar situation. The only difference is the reason for wanting to leave.

[ASmith4ever]

the military is wrong on this one. You don't get someone to commit to their future and then screw up their plans after the fact. They should have some kind of common sense appeal process.

He signed a contract with the military LONG before his contract with the NFL. So who screwed up his future?

[ASmith4ever]

this is lame for the military. they see someone made it past their policy so they revamp it so he cant play. watch the movie "stop-loss" then you can see how f--ked up our gov. is. the military could have made itself look so good by letting him play if he made the team, but now they are looking like complete a-holes by redoing this policy AFTER! he gets a chance to make a team.

That movie holds a lot of inaccuracies. But stop loss is also in the contract you sign your name on, so it isn't necessarily a surprise

[ASmith4ever]

Honestly, if you listen to some interviews of war vets after experiencing years or months in war they wanted to get the hell back home. Green soldiers [new recuits or soldiers new to real live combat] want to fight. I do not want soldiers that "want to fight" or kill. I want soldiers who hate war but still fight to defend this country.

Key word some. Currently, nearly 35% of the soldiers deployed VOLUNTEERED to deploy with untis other than there own. "Vets" as you call them, aren't vets until they retire or discharge and typically the one's who wanted to come home were the ones who signed up for the wrong reason in the first place.

Now, understandably, many soldiers want to come hom because they have been away from their families for over a year, but it hardly ever has to do with the fact that they are in a war

[The OLD Cookie Monster]

I think it's hilarious that people are saying "screw the government", "this is terrible". He joined the armed forces people, you don't do that with the intention of playing pro sports, you do it with the intention to serve our country. The fact of the matter is he's a soldier first and a football player second. And during a time of war you can't give away soldiers to entertainment.

[ASmith4ever]

bad for the NFL. for one there are a ton of good ball players out there maybe with not good enough grades to get into a good school. had Campbell made a name for himself in the league that would attract a lot of kids to choose a career in army, navy or the air force acadamies rather then prep schools.

on top of that with all the chris henry's and pac man jones' going around now a days they needed a guy like Caleb Campbell.

Dumbest statement ever...

the Academies are among the most difficult schools to complete academically. This goes right along with the concept that all soldiers in unintelligent.

Do some research please

[The OLD Cookie Monster]

Dumbest statement ever...

the Academies are among the most difficult schools to complete academically. This goes right along with the concept that all soldiers in unintelligent.

Do some research please

It was JiGGA who posted it, so in his defense it's normal to make comments that ignorant.

[sandiegojoe]

He signed a contract with the military LONG before his contract with the NFL. So who screwed up his future?

Yeah, but when he planned out his college choice, he went into it based on the rules at the time.

You change the rules once he's already committed and you're screwin him. they ought to grandfather people in who signed up prior to the rule change.

[ASmith4ever]

Yeah, but when he planned out his college choice, he went into it based on the rules at the time.

You change the rules once he's already committed and you're screwin him. they ought to grandfather people in who signed up prior to the rule change.

You're going to blame that on the Army? Have you ever signed a military contract? Have you ever raised your right hand and taken this oath?

I, (state your name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Because I have, and if I am not mistaken, no where in there does it say "unless I choose to play professional football".

I guarantee you that the NEVER guaranteed him the opportunity to forego his military service in order to play football. If they had, we would have heard about it. He has already said he will perform his service like he signed up to do.

"When I got drafted, I told people that I was going to have the best of both worlds," Campbell said. "I was going to be in the United States Army and I was going to have a chance to play professional football. Now, I have the best of one world and I'm very positive about that. It's all going to work out.

As per ESPN.com

That doesn't sound like he is ungrateful whatsoever

And beyond that, he could have played ANYWHERE HE WANTED TO. Apparently he wanted to play for Army, which simply put, means that he wanted to serve our country and I will forever commend him for that.

[sandiegojoe]

I agree he doesn't sound ungrateful in that quote. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. I'm guessing his #1 dream has been taken away from him, and he's trying to look dignified in accepting his back up plan. He was a dummy to sign that contract since there are no guarantees. It just sucks for him because he went in with one perception and then got hosed. It's too bad the military can't be a bit more accomodating at a time when they need all the public support they can get.

Personally, looking at the economics of it, I think it's better for him to play ball, make a few mil, pay a lot of taxes which can then fund a handful of military guys instead of just one.

[ASmith4ever]

I agree he doesn't sound ungrateful in that quote. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. I'm guessing his #1 dream has been taken away from him, and he's trying to look dignified in accepting his back up plan. He was a dummy to sign that contract since there are no guarantees. It just sucks for him because he went in with one perception and then got hosed. It's too bad the military can't be a bit more accomodating at a time when they need all the public support they can get.

Personally, looking at the economics of it, I think it's better for him to play ball, make a few mil, pay a lot of taxes which can then fund a handful of military guys instead of just one.

The Army is in MUCH more dire need for officers than it is for the public support.

I don't think he ever went in with the wrong perception like you are saying.

[sandiegojoe]

I don't think he ever went in with the wrong perception like you are saying.

When I got drafted, I told people that I was going to have the best of both worlds," Campbell said. "I was going to be in the United States Army and I was going to have a chance to play professional football.

that was his perception. That ain't what he got.

[MR. WEBBER]

guess nobody else is saying it so i will. WE SHOULDNT BE OVER THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. this shouldnt even be in issue, we shouldnt be in this war and campbell shouldnt be stopped from living his dream of playing football. WHICH A RULE!!! SAID HE COULD!

[LVNiner80]

guess nobody else is saying it so i will. WE SHOULDNT BE OVER THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. this shouldnt even be in issue, we shouldnt be in this war and campbell shouldnt be stopped from living his dream of playing football. WHICH A RULE!!! SAID HE COULD!

Yea we should. Maybe not as many troops and maybe not Iraq, but it wouldn't be smart to completely abandon the middle east.

[bilwit]

Yea we should. Maybe not as many troops and maybe not Iraq, but it wouldn't be smart to completely abandon the middle east.

It wouldn't be smart to completely abandon it now, but his point was we shouldn't have been in there to start with.

[sandiegojoe]

he could probably be a lot more effective to the army as a full time nfl player and a part-time recruiter.

seems like a big waste of talent.

[ASmith4ever]

guess nobody else is saying it so i will. WE SHOULDNT BE OVER THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. this shouldnt even be in issue, we shouldnt be in this war and campbell shouldnt be stopped from living his dream of playing football. WHICH A RULE!!! SAID HE COULD!

His need in the Army would be there with or without the war. That is a moot point. The Army has been hurting for officers for nearly a decade. In fact, the War has brought MORE people to the call.

Besides what you may think, we are doing a lot of good things over there and the bad things are COMPLETELY amplified by the media. When you look at the death numbers on the American side, sure they look rather high at around 4100 (only 3300 of which are combat related). Since the war started, there have been 1,350,000 troops deployed, bring the death toll to around 0.24%. That's not even HALF of a percent. To put it into perspective, the Battle of the Somme in World War I had morethan 50,000 deaths in a 24 hour period.

Thewar we are fighting is WORTH the price being paid.

[ASmith4ever]

he could probably be a lot more effective to the army as a full time nfl player and a part-time recruiter.

seems like a big waste of talent.

Do you know who typically gets assigned to recruit?

[Iowa49erFan]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8097a9dc&template=with-video&confirm=true

I just saw this on NFL.com

Wasnt sure if it had been posted, kind of interesting.

Does Detroit get a pick back or some sort of compensation?

[sandiegojoe]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8097a9dc&template=with-video&confirm=true

I just saw this on NFL.com

Wasnt sure if it had been posted, kind of interesting.

Does Detroit get a pick back or some sort of compensation?

I think they're just outta luck. I'd be pissed if i was a lions fan. I really feel bad for the kid though. It sucks to be so close and then have the opportunity snatched away.

it's one thing when a stupid war affects the economy, but when it starts to affect football you know things are out of hand. ;)

[the snowman]

The Army is in MUCH more dire need for officers than it is for the public support.

I don't think he ever went in with the wrong perception like you are saying.

you sound like a bill oreilly guy

[ASmith4ever]

you sound like a bill oreilly guy

No, I just say that because I signed the exact same contract and took the exact same oath he did.

[the snowman]

His need in the Army would be there with or without the war. That is a moot point. The Army has been hurting for officers for nearly a decade. In fact, the War has brought MORE people to the call.

Besides what you may think, we are doing a lot of good things over there and the bad things are COMPLETELY amplified by the media. When you look at the death numbers on the American side, sure they look rather high at around 4100 (only 3300 of which are combat related). Since the war started, there have been 1,350,000 troops deployed, bring the death toll to around 0.24%. That's not even HALF of a percent. To put it into perspective, the Battle of the Somme in World War I had morethan 50,000 deaths in a 24 hour period.

Thewar we are fighting is WORTH the price being paid.

what does that matter-they're still dead soldiers...and they died in a useless war...i dont care if everything is "going swell and dandy" now..the point is that we should of never been there...

[the snowman]

No, I just say that because I signed the exact same contract and took the exact same oath he did.

yeah but have you ever been drafted into the NFL-go through all the training and then have that all taken away from you too...i think not

[ASmith4ever]

yeah but have you ever been drafted into the NFL-go through all the training and then have that all taken away from you too...i think not

Football isn't the only thing in life. And it very likely wasn't HIS number one priority.

[The OLD Cookie Monster]

yeah but have you ever been drafted into the NFL-go through all the training and then have that all taken away from you too...i think not

You act like the Army did it to him on a personal scale, the bottom line is his life was signed away to the government, he signed the paper. Nobody forced him to sign it.

[ASmith4ever]

what does that matter-they're still dead soldiers...and they died in a useless war...i dont care if everything is "going swell and dandy" now..the point is that we should of never been there...

That's your opinion, but those of us in the military (for the most part) disagree. Considering ALL members of the military since 2005 were under NEW contracts that happened AFTER the war started, you can't blame this on anyone but the soldiers themselves. I signed up proudly and hope my brothers in arms did the same.

You saying we never should have been there is your opinion and far from being factual

[the snowman]

You act like the Army did it to him on a personal scale, the bottom line is his life was signed away to the government, he signed the paper. Nobody forced him to sign it.

they changed the freakin rule...hence the personal level

[the snowman]

That's your opinion, but those of us in the military (for the most part) disagree. Considering ALL members of the military since 2005 were under NEW contracts that happened AFTER the war started, you can't blame this on anyone but the soldiers themselves. I signed up proudly and hope my brothers in arms did the same.

You saying we never should have been there is your opinion and far from being factual

go on...please explain how we should be there

[ASmith4ever]

no **** they arent eazy to get into but anybody can sign up for the military and with the crazy discipline they teach our troops they should almost all be able to get into the academies for one because they are no less intellegent then then next person and for two again, because of their discipline. those guys will work their tails off to get into the academy.

99% of the Academy graduates were NOT enlisted before attending, thus not already having the discipline you speak of. Besides, discipline to do physical work and the discipline to do academic work are two entirely different things.

[ASmith4ever]

go on...please explain how we should be there

1) Sadaam was killing his own people and violating humanitarian rights. The UN chose to ignore this, thus the United States stepped in.

2) To improve the way of life for a country that before our occupance had little amounts of running water, poor educational system, and unstable government

3) To prevent to spread of Nuclear waepons.

In order of importance

[the snowman]

QUOTE=ASmith4ever
1) Sadaam was killing his own people and violating humanitarian rights. The UN chose to ignore this, thus the United States stepped in.
check every country in africa...oh and north korea and south america-its about the oil baby dont kid yourself

2) To improve the way of life for a country that before our occupance had little amounts of running water, poor educational system, and unstable government
what about our neighbors in south america?
3) To prevent to spread of Nuclear waepons.
so only the superpowers get to use it then right...i mean god forbidd china attacks a 3rd world country...oh wait we'll just sell them the weapons and make a profitIn order of importance

[sandiegojoe]

1) Sadaam was killing his own people and violating humanitarian rights. The UN chose to ignore this, thus the United States stepped in.

2) To improve the way of life for a country that before our occupance had little amounts of running water, poor educational system, and unstable government

3) To prevent to spread of Nuclear waepons.

In order of importance

a bit late to be changing the rules. Don't worry though we'l be out soon enough. Obama and Iraq both want us out. hopefully we can focus on the realw ar after that.

[the snowman]

a bit late to be changing the rules. Don't worry though we'l be out soon enough. Obama and Iraq both want us out. hopefully we can focus on the realw ar after that.

afgan right?

[sandiegojoe]

unless Bush gets us into Iran first

[bruin4life]

Yeah, but when he planned out his college choice, he went into it based on the rules at the time.

You change the rules once he's already committed and you're screwin him. they ought to grandfather people in who signed up prior to the rule change.

Per the Article the law that would have allowed him to play in the NFL came about in 2005, he graduated recently (2008) thusly making his freshman year 2004. So realistically the law you and he are arguing for wasn't even in effect until AFTER he enlisted at the academy. So to say this would have affected his choice on college really seems inaccurate and untrue. He joined an Academy with the intentions of going into the military but during the way another opportunity has arisen that chances are coming out of high school he didn't think was possible.

I again want to remind people that he was a 7th round pick and there's no guarantee he'd make a team so to argue as if he should be allowed to play is moot when one realized he may not even be employed by an nfl team 4 months from now to begin with.

[bruin4life]

he could probably be a lot more effective to the army as a full time nfl player and a part-time recruiter.

seems like a big waste of talent.

How? Is he really going to recruit a bunch of spoiled rich punks playing football into the military? Is he really going to do more for the military as a practice squad player than what the legacy of Tillman has done or what a full time recruiter is doing?

The last part about big waste of talent I have to question to. Realisitcally if it wasn't for this military issue would he be any more appealing to you than Mr Irrelevant is? Would you really think that this is a guy who's guaranteed to make the 53 man roster?

If the answer is no, then realize he would have never gotten the best of both worlds as he so eloquently put it.

[650Niners]

I must spread rep around snowman

[SB49er4life]

1) Sadaam was killing his own people and violating humanitarian rights. The UN chose to ignore this, thus the United States stepped in.

2) To improve the way of life for a country that before our occupance had little amounts of running water, poor educational system, and unstable government

Wouldn't it make just a LITTLE more sense to worry about solving your own countries problems before launching into full-fledged warfare over seas ?

Last time I checked, New Orleans is still in great need of help after Hurricane Katrina, the U.S. education system is **** and the streets are pouring with crime and poverty.

It's like making sure you feed the kids down the street while letting your own kids starve.

A nice gesture is one thing, but handle your ****ing business, first.



3) To prevent to spread of Nuclear waepons.

In order of importance

Yes, let's do that by following the lead of a President whose family had close ties with the #1 terrorist in the world at one point...

[sandiegojoe]

How? Is he really going to recruit a bunch of spoiled rich punks playing football into the military? Is he really going to do more for the military as a practice squad player than what the legacy of Tillman has done or what a full time recruiter is doing?


tillman's legacy isn't drawing anyone to the military, if anything his friendly-fire death has been used as anti-war material.

if he had lived though, he would have definitely been a useful recruiting tool.

this guy could definitely do more than a full time recruiter. whether it's tv spots in the local media, visiting high schools, etc... kids are much more interested in football players than typical bonehead army recruiters. This was a guy who could have had the best of both wolds and inspired people.

[bruin4life]

tillman's legacy isn't drawing anyone to the military, if anything his friendly-fire death has been used as anti-war material.

if he had lived though, he would have definitely been a useful recruiting tool.

this guy could definitely do more than a full time recruiter. whether it's tv spots in the local media, visiting high schools, etc... kids are much more interested in football players than typical bonehead army recruiters. This was a guy who could have had the best of both wolds and inspired people.

That's great but what about my other post about how the policy was changed after he was enrolled and then set back to the original policy after he graduated? You seem to view it was unfair that the policy was changed not allowing him to practice with the Lions but haven't addressed the fact that it just brings him full circle to where he was as a freshman who enlisted to be in the military not to be in the NFL.

[bruin4life]

I do want to add that the negative side to him being able to recruit is that you get more people at the academy treating it like any other D1 school and using it to try and get to the nfl instead of why they are truely there. You may think he'd do wonders for the enlistment of the military but it would end up with non-committed people in a full commitment academy program thusly jeopardize the quality of cadet that comes out of there.

Would it truely be benefecial to see a military academy being ran like Ohio State or Miami where the graduation rate is a distant 2nd to the number of players in the nfl?

[gnoix]

its a heartbreaker for him, especially as an athlete and as a soldier. we all know he wants to do both but cant, and that sucks.

[sandiegojoe]

I do want to add that the negative side to him being able to recruit is that you get more people at the academy treating it like any other D1 school and using it to try and get to the nfl instead of why they are truely there. You may think he'd do wonders for the enlistment of the military but it would end up with non-committed people in a full commitment academy program thusly jeopardize the quality of cadet that comes out of there.

Would it truely be benefecial to see a military academy being ran like Ohio State or Miami where the graduation rate is a distant 2nd to the number of players in the nfl?


nah, i doubt it'd go that far. more like just a way to get the message out about officer training based on a bit of nfl celebrity status.

only a handful of guys get drafted from any college. the odds of making it to the nfl are so slim, that allowing a couple guys a year to enter the league isn't going to change anything for the military.

as for the 2004 205 stuff, he still had his hopes raised p, only to later have them taken away. that sucks and reflects poorly on the military. it also sucks since it wasted a draft pick. the military let him go down this road, and then told him after the fact that he couldn't. they screwed up and oughta make an exception.

[SB49er4life]

It's not what you can screw for your country, it's what your country can screw for you.

Pat Tillman's death should just go to show that if you have any realistic possibilities as an athlete, stay away from Uncle Sam and his deceitful ways.

[MR. WEBBER]

1) Sadaam was killing his own people and violating humanitarian rights. The UN chose to ignore this, thus the United States stepped in.

2) To improve the way of life for a country that before our occupance had little amounts of running water, poor educational system, and unstable government

3) To prevent to spread of Nuclear waepons.

In order of importance

its funny you say those things. because not one of those are the original reason we went over there. but nice try. this war is a complete joke and bush is the worst president to ever serve. you can tell those families of the fallen soliders it was worth it. or that only .24 % is worth it. im sure they will disagree. i have to agree with others. lets fix our problems first, then help the world. plus why do we always have to be big brother and help out? if the UN didnt want to why couldnt we just follow suit? i know you dont want to admit it, but its all about oil. it always has been, the bush family got rich on it, and it still runs his life. isnt i amazing the oil companies can have over a BILLION DOLLARS IN PROFIT A YEAR, but we have to pay these outrageous prices? think about it.

[ASmith4ever]

its funny you say those things. because not one of those are the original reason we went over there.but nice try.

Well since you seem to know more about the way that I am actually fighting, enlighten me? Because you can bet your @$$ I know much more about why we are over there than you do. You hear from the media, I am a direct source.

this war is a complete joke and bush is the worst president to ever serve. you can tell those families of the fallen soliders it was worth it. or that only .24 % is worth it. im sure they will disagree.

You have obviously never studied history. Bush may not be the best President to ever serve, but he is FAR from the worst.

And I have HAD to do exactly that. Tell families that their sons lives were worth the fight and you know what, the largest majority of them are proud of their childs service and are greatful for their selfless actions. You, sir, are simply misinformed.

i have to agree with others. lets fix our problems first, then help the world. plus why do we always have to be big brother and help out?

Our problems, in my opinion, are beyond fixing. Our problem in this country is not the President, it isn't the policies, it isn't the War and it isn't the economy. Our problem in this country is the inability for its citizens to get along. This country hasn't been this slpit since the CIVIL WAR and it predates the Bush Administration. The issues that are deeply tearing away at the American structure is a result of the Vietnam era, from which I am not sure we'll ever recover. It doesn't start at the top this time, it starts with us.

if the UN didnt want to why couldnt we just follow suit? i know you dont want to admit it, but its all about oil. it always has been, the bush family got rich on it, and it still runs his life. isnt i amazing the oil companies can have over a BILLION DOLLARS IN PROFIT A YEAR, but we have to pay these outrageous prices? think about it.

Way to twist it. The UN didn't want to, because France didn't want to. The UN is a useless system with its current makeup. It doesn't run like a true democracy should and will never accomplish anything noteworthy.

Where did you get this information about the Bush family getting rich off oil (like they needed oil to be rich)? Or that the war is about the oil? Did some friend of yours tell you? Did you hear it on the news? Please enlighten me, because apparently being in the war has me confused.

[ASmith4ever]

It's not what you can screw for your country, it's what your country can screw for you.

Pat Tillman's death should just go to show that if you have any realistic possibilities as an athlete, stay away from Uncle Sam and his deceitful ways.

Yeah, Uncle Sam obviously wanted Pat Tillman to die in friendly fire. It's the Army's plan for every soldier!

Ignorant

[ASmith4ever]

1) Sadaam was killing his own people and violating humanitarian rights. The UN chose to ignore this, thus the United States stepped in.
check every country in africa...oh and north korea and south america-its about the oil baby dont kid yourself

Countries in which we actually have soldiers, you just aren't aware of it. There also in Africa! Weird... Its called "Special Forces" I don't believe there are a lot of oil resources in some of these countries (minus Venezuela)

When you hear on the news that a Navy Seal or an Army Ranger died in a "training accident", guess again.


2) To improve the way of life for a country that before our occupance had little amounts of running water, poor educational system, and unstable government
what about our neighbors in south america?

See above

3) To prevent to spread of Nuclear waepons.
so only the superpowers get to use it then right...i mean god forbidd china attacks a 3rd world country...oh wait we'll just sell them the weapons and make a profitIn order of importance

Use it? That's the point! We don't want them used!! The "superpowers" have a responisibility to prevent the spread of a weapon this destructive. Obviously this is too far off your radar

[ASmith4ever]

Wouldn't it make just a LITTLE more sense to worry about solving your own countries problems before launching into full-fledged warfare over seas ?

Last time I checked, New Orleans is still in great need of help after Hurricane Katrina, the U.S. education system is **** and the streets are pouring with crime and poverty.

The New Orleans debacle was made out to be MUCH worse than it was. I was there as part of the first wave of soldiers, they didn't WANT our help. The U.S. Educational system is a joke because of the teachers (I have a degree in Secondary Education). Most teachers don't care! They take their summers off and collect their joke of a paycheck. But these teacher are the reason they get paid so little to begin with. Trust me, I've seen the quality of teachers produced from the educational system and you can't MAKE someone have a passion for the betterment of the students.

[MR. WEBBER]

Well since you seem to know more about the way that I am actually fighting, enlighten me? Because you can bet your @$$ I know much more about why we are over there than you do. You hear from the media, I am a direct source.

well the president that you say isnt the worst in history first said we were going over there to get weapons of mass distruction. oops didnt find ANY!

then it was because they were funding terrorist. oops, no proof of that either.

now your coming out and trying to tell me why we are there,which none of those reasons were the original ones.

your just a pawn in this game. you dont have any idea why you are there. or are you best friends with the prez and i should know about that? you do what you are told from people who have no idea what they are doing or how to fix a problem. if they did we wouldnt be in this mess that we are in now.

[ASmith4ever]

well the president that you say isnt the worst in history first said we were going over there to get weapons of mass distruction. oops didnt find ANY!

They were in the process of developing the **** things, I have seen the silos in person. No we didn't find any completed versions thank God. Of course there is always Iran. Where we will be by December. It's already in the works.

then it was because they were funding terrorist. oops, no proof of that either.

Not only were they helping fund it, but they were also harboring them. A number of terrorists were were captured in Iraq while in hiding. Sadaam himself was a terrorist.

now your coming out and trying to tell me why we are there,which none of those reasons were the original ones.

your just a pawn in this game. you dont have any idea why you are there. or are you best friends with the prez and i should know about that? you do what you are told from people who have no idea what they are doing or how to fix a problem. if they did we wouldnt be in this mess that we are in no

Well apparently you seem to be the expert... I wouldn't call it a mess anyway. The war has been much more successful then you know. But you haven't personally walk the streets of Bahgdad so you wouldn't know. Why don't you take a visit? It isn't that bad, seriously

[roleplay3r1]

I keep reading the title of this and for some reason I always think it says 'army grad shot'.

[MR. WEBBER]

They were in the process of developing the **** things, I have seen the silos in person. No we didn't find any completed versions thank God. Of course there is always Iran. Where we will be by December. It's already in the works.



Not only were they helping fund it, but they were also harboring them. A number of terrorists were were captured in Iraq while in hiding. Sadaam himself was a terrorist.



Well apparently you seem to be the expert... I wouldn't call it a mess anyway. The war has been much more successful then you know. But you haven't personally walk the streets of Bahgdad so you wouldn't know. Why don't you take a visit? It isn't that bad, seriously


making their lives better isnt our job. we have no business still being there.

[ASmith4ever]

making their lives better isnt our job. we have no business still being there.

What do you mean we? Are you in the military? Are you over there doing the work?

That's your opinion and that's why YOU aren't over there. That's your decision. What I am saying is that those of us that are in the military are in it for a reason. We WANT to help them!

If you wanted to go to Columbia on a mission trip I wouldn't be trying to stop you...

So, instead of blaming our government for "sending troops over to die", why don't you just understand the fact that it is just as much our decision as theirs. Who do you think influences the government in military affairs? It's called the Joint Chiefs of Staff and they represent us.

98% of the military agrees with what we are doing, so why can't you just let us do it.

I have a feeling your the type of guy that sports a "Support Our Troops" magnet on your car, but have never even considered sending a care package. The only thing you support is corporate America for producing a magnet as a sales ploy

[MR. WEBBER]

i have a bunch of friends in different branches of the military. all of them that came back said it is BS. ive had a couple that had to go back another time. not one of them liked it or wanted to do it. im sure if you gave most the troops the decision to stay there or come home, most would say come home. its not their decision, its the gov. to say its their decision to die for someone in iraq is a complete joke. maybe an american,but not for someone from iraq.

[SB49er4life]

What do you mean we? Are you in the military? Are you over there doing the work?

That's your opinion and that's why YOU aren't over there. That's your decision. What I am saying is that those of us that are in the military are in it for a reason. We WANT to help them!

If you wanted to go to Columbia on a mission trip I wouldn't be trying to stop you...

So, instead of blaming our government for "sending troops over to die", why don't you just understand the fact that it is just as much our decision as theirs. Who do you think influences the government in military affairs? It's called the Joint Chiefs of Staff and they represent us.

98% of the military agrees with what we are doing, so why can't you just let us do it.

I have a feeling your the type of guy that sports a "Support Our Troops" magnet on your car, but have never even considered sending a care package. The only thing you support is corporate America for producing a magnet as a sales ploy

Yes, you "want" to do it... at the expense of everyone's tax dollars.

Whether it's your choice or not, I think most American's would thank you to stay outta there instead of putting hard earned money towards unnecessary death and destruction.

Bottom line, there are far too many problems in the U.S. to be worried about "helping" other countries, especially when those other countries are Anti-U.S. and would love nothing more than to see our own country crash and burn.

[ASmith4ever]

i have a bunch of friends in different branches of the military. all of them that came back said it is BS. ive had a couple that had to go back another time. not one of them liked it or wanted to do it. im sure if you gave most the troops the decision to stay there or come home, most would say come home. its not their decision, its the gov. to say its their decision to die for someone in iraq is a complete joke. maybe an american,but not for someone from iraq.

I don't doubt that some of your friends may not want to be there, but that isn't the vast majority. I'm also not sure how accurate your statement of a "bunch" of friends "all say" its BS. I think you are scared to actually show numbers of who wants to be there and who doesn't.

In most cases, even including myself, soldiers don't want to be there so LONG. For instance, the Marines and Army have tours of 12 months plus (they just lowered it from 18 months), while the Air Force does tours of around 3 months and sometimes as little as 2 weeks.

The reason they don't want to be there so long ISN'T because of the war itself, but because they don't want to be away from their families anymore

The government doesn't send anyone over there to die, that is the most ignorant statement you could ever say.

Now getting back to your friends, do you realize everyone of them have a contract that started AFTER the war did? Why are they staying in if they don't want to be over there? Is it really the governments fault?

[MR. WEBBER]

I don't doubt that some of your friends may not want to be there, but that isn't the vast majority. I'm also not sure how accurate your statement of a "bunch" of friends "all say" its BS. I think you are scared to actually show numbers of who wants to be there and who doesn't.

In most cases, even including myself, soldiers don't want to be there so LONG. For instance, the Marines and Army have tours of 12 months plus (they just lowered it from 18 months), while the Air Force does tours of around 3 months and sometimes as little as 2 weeks.

The reason they don't want to be there so long ISN'T because of the war itself, but because they don't want to be away from their families anymore

The government doesn't send anyone over there to die, that is the most ignorant statement you could ever say.

Now getting back to your friends, do you realize everyone of them have a contract that started AFTER the war did? Why are they staying in if they don't want to be over there? Is it really the governments fault?

how many soliders have died over there? everyone of those deaths was a waste. no reason for it. wasnt the fact we went over seas was to find bin laden? it was all start because of 911. doesnt seem like we are looking at all for him. its been how long and we cant find him. but yet we can find saddam in a lil tiny hole? hmmm, that makes alot of sense.

now ask yourself how many billions of dollars we are wasting helping these people. i can think of plenty of ways to spend that money here to make OUR country better.

[ASmith4ever]

Yes, you "want" to do it... at the expense of everyone's tax dollars.

In wartime or not the defense department gets the lion share of funding from tax dollars. The fact that more goes to it has to do with Congress, which is headed up by the people who supposedly disagree with the war in the first place COUGHObamaCOUGH.

Whether it's your choice or not, I think most American's would thank you to stay outta there instead of putting hard earned money towards unnecessary death and destruction.

See you are only one voice saying that and while there are many that agree with you in the United States, how many of you have actually seen any of this "unnecessary death and destruction" from anywhere other than the media, which only reports the number of deaths? Why don't they ever tell you about the fact that right now, Iraq has running water 24 hours a day, internet access, home telephone access, 2300 refurbished schools, with an additional 4500 schools built since the beginning of the war; which opened up more than 35,000 new jobs to Iraqis and raised raised their salaries from the pre-war $5 monthly pay, to $66.

I'm afraid I disagree with you. Although there has been death and some destruction, I have seen it an wouldn't call it unnecessary. In fact the improvement to the lives of Iraq citizens far outweighs that of any destruction, which doesn't even occur nearly as often as you think.

Many of the deaths to US soldiers in Iraq have been by natural causes, training accidents, and even stupidity. How often do you hear about these same deaths to soldiers IN the United States? Hardly ever... Why? Because it doesn't affect the Iraq War death tally. So what is the real crime?

Bottom line, there are far too many problems in the U.S. to be worried about "helping" other countries, especially when those other countries are Anti-U.S. and would love nothing more than to see our own country crash and burn.

Is the country really anti-U.S.? Who in Iraq have you spoken too? I have patrolled the streets and spoken with government officials on numerous occasions and I can tell you that the people who disagree with our presence over there are about as great as the percentage of people who are unemployed in San Francisco (somewhere between 3% and 5%).

[ASmith4ever]

how many soliders have died over there? everyone of those deaths was a waste. no reason for it. wasnt the fact we went over seas was to find bin laden? it was all start because of 911. doesnt seem like we are looking at all for him. its been how long and we cant find him. but yet we can find saddam in a lil tiny hole? hmmm, that makes alot of sense.

now ask yourself how many billions of dollars we are wasting helping these people. i can think of plenty of ways to spend that money here to make OUR country better.

The War in Iraq was only partly started to find Bin Laden. The War in Afghanistan is where that effort lies. Afghanistan and Iraq are two completely different countries geographically. Iraq is very flat, while Afghanistan is very mountainous with hundreds of thousands of cave networks. Sadaam was one of many people who helped to harbor Bin Laden, thus making it more difficult to find him. Sadaam, on the other hand, didn't have anywhere NEAR the same support, thus making it easier.

I haven't been deployed to Afghanistan myself, but a good buddy of mine got back in March and they went in "search teams" of patrol sized elements (2 squads of 18-20 people) 5 days a week, covering as much ground as 100 square miles in that time. We don't have any idea where Osama Bin Laden is, and many agree that he isn't even in Afghanistan anymore. The popular choice is Iran

[Khannie112]

I like what peter king wrote this morning in his article (and I usually don't like what King has to write).

The Army allowed this guy to go to NYC, gets interviewed on ESPN, represent for the Army (basically FREE advertising for the Army) and then gets drafted - now he has to throw all that away? Then WHY OH why did they allow him to do all that and then decide we changed our mind?

[MR. WEBBER]

I like what peter king wrote this morning in his article (and I usually don't like what King has to write).

The Army allowed this guy to go to NYC, gets interviewed on ESPN, represent for the Army (basically FREE advertising for the Army) and then gets drafted - now he has to throw all that away? Then WHY OH why did they allow him to do all that and then decide we changed our mind?

because recruiting is hurting right now for the army. so if they parade campbell out there, and the media runs with it. it puts the army back in the lime light. makes them look good and they are hoping people enlist. once all that was complete, they go back and take it all away from campbell. typical for this administration.

[ASmith4ever]

I like what peter king wrote this morning in his article (and I usually don't like what King has to write).

The Army allowed this guy to go to NYC, gets interviewed on ESPN, represent for the Army (basically FREE advertising for the Army) and then gets drafted - now he has to throw all that away? Then WHY OH why did they allow him to do all that and then decide we changed our mind?

They are looking at it all wrong though.

1) He wasn't drafted, he was under contract, one that he signed 4 years ago. What if Patrick Willis just went to the Lions, despite having a contract with us? the only difference is the Army isn't a football team, it's an organization. His contract with the Army SAID SPECIFICALLY that he had to serve for at least 4 years upon graduation. The fact that they are even considering letting him do 2 years and then come back, if he wants to, is a stipulation for athletes (in which they still have to complete 2 years as a recruiter).

2) They didn't change their mind. This stipulation has been in effect since 2005, however, no professional athletes have come out of Army in that time, except for two minor league baseball players who must ALSO report at the end of the season.

"Has to throw it all away"?

He signed the contract, he took that risk, don't blame the military

[ASmith4ever]

because recruiting is hurting right now for the army. so if they parade campbell out there, and the media runs with it. it puts the army back in the lime light. makes them look good and they are hoping people enlist. once all that was complete, they go back and take it all away from campbell. typical for this administration.

Exactly what "administration" are you referring to?

[Khannie112]

They are looking at it all wrong though.

1) He wasn't drafted, he was under contract, one that he signed 4 years ago. What if Patrick Willis just went to the Lions, despite having a contract with us? the only difference is the Army isn't a football team, it's an organization. His contract with the Army SAID SPECIFICALLY that he had to serve for at least 4 years upon graduation. The fact that they are even considering letting him do 2 years and then come back, if he wants to, is a stipulation for athletes (in which they still have to complete 2 years as a recruiter).

2) They didn't change their mind. This stipulation has been in effect since 2005, however, no professional athletes have come out of Army in that time, except for two minor league baseball players who must ALSO report at the end of the season.

"Has to throw it all away"?

He signed the contract, he took that risk, don't blame the military

No - he was drafted: http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/caleb-campbell?id=1687

I agree with you on point #2, but why encourage him (and make him feel like he was going to be an exception) and then take it away? It was told before that he could've served his last remaining years as a recruiter - but then BAM, they changed their mind.

Ok - he signed his military contract, but then the ARMY led him to believe he was going to be able to play in the NFL AND fulfill his ARMY duties....

[Khannie112]

He meant he wasn't drafted by the army, he signed a binding contract with them.

Just me or are fans *****ing way more than this kid? He's already said he's perfectly ok with it. Just let it go.

Oh - I see.

I just didn't like the fact that they told him one thing and then switched it up.

[MR. WEBBER]

Oh - I see.

I just didn't like the fact that they told him one thing and then switched it up.

agreed. the army tried saving face by saying soliders could play their sports if drafted, then when one gets to try and play in the nfl they back track and say, nope, you have to serve overseas. i just think they made themselves look really bad here.

[SB49er4life]

In wartime or not the defense department gets the lion share of funding from tax dollars. The fact that more goes to it has to do with Congress, which is headed up by the people who supposedly disagree with the war in the first place COUGHObamaCOUGH.



See you are only one voice saying that and while there are many that agree with you in the United States, how many of you have actually seen any of this "unnecessary death and destruction" from anywhere other than the media, which only reports the number of deaths? Why don't they ever tell you about the fact that right now, Iraq has running water 24 hours a day, internet access, home telephone access, 2300 refurbished schools, with an additional 4500 schools built since the beginning of the war; which opened up more than 35,000 new jobs to Iraqis and raised raised their salaries from the pre-war $5 monthly pay, to $66.

I'm afraid I disagree with you. Although there has been death and some destruction, I have seen it an wouldn't call it unnecessary. In fact the improvement to the lives of Iraq citizens far outweighs that of any destruction, which doesn't even occur nearly as often as you think.

Many of the deaths to US soldiers in Iraq have been by natural causes, training accidents, and even stupidity. How often do you hear about these same deaths to soldiers IN the United States? Hardly ever... Why? Because it doesn't affect the Iraq War death tally. So what is the real crime?



Is the country really anti-U.S.? Who in Iraq have you spoken too? I have patrolled the streets and spoken with government officials on numerous occasions and I can tell you that the people who disagree with our presence over there are about as great as the percentage of people who are unemployed in San Francisco (somewhere between 3% and 5%).

Ya, the economy is the worst it's been since basically the Depression, gas prices have soared so high that people can't even afford to get to work, but IT's OK BECAUSE THE IRAQI'S HAVE RUNNING WATER AND HIGH SPEED INTERNET !!

I'm sorry man, I understand in your mind that it is the "noble" thing to do to help these people, but U.S. does not have it's priorities straight.

FIRST THINGS FIRST.

When you've fed your own children and family, THEN you can start talkin' about sharing some with the kids at the end of the block.

It's MY tax dollars, and they aren't being used to MY benefit in any way.

[The OLD Cookie Monster]

Ya, the economy is the worst it's been since basically the Depression, gas prices have soared so high that people can't even afford to get to work, but IT's OK BECAUSE THE IRAQI'S HAVE RUNNING WATER AND HIGH SPEED INTERNET !!

I'm sorry man, I understand in your mind that it is the "noble" thing to do to help these people, but U.S. does not have it's priorities straight.

FIRST THINGS FIRST.

When you've fed your own children and family, THEN you can start talkin' about sharing some with the kids at the end of the block.

It's MY tax dollars, and they aren't being used to MY benefit in any way.


Just curious, do you think we should cut off funding in Iraq while our soldiers are there?

[ASmith4ever]

Oh - I see.

I just didn't like the fact that they told him one thing and then switched it up.

He wasn't drafted, he went to the Westpoint Academy, which produces officers. Officers aren't drafted. They are commissioned under their own decision to pursue that route. I am an officer, I know.

They didn't just tell him he could play and then switch it on him. I signed the exact same contract he did, which included the same stipulation his did about pursuing a professional athletic career. Each contract is NOT individually assembled depending on the person. Here is the exact verbage from my contract about athletics as an alternative:

This contract represtents an agreement entered into between the United States Army and the Reserve Officer Training Corps OR the Westpoint Corps of Cadets named herein, with the consent of a guardian in the cadet is under 18 years of age, to affect said cadets participation in the Officer Commissioning process. It is hereby agreed by both parties, the United States Army and the Cadet, that the sole purpose of the Reserve Officer Training Corps and the Westpoint Corps of Cadets to prodce officers for the United States Army. Entry into this program is a serious commitment. This commitment must be made with the resolve to attain a commision. If there is any doubts about the prospective cadet's ability or determination to fufill the terms of this contract, then this contract should not be exectuted.

Further on it states under Article 1 - DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AGREEMENT it states:

f. Should said cadet wish to pursue a career in professional sports and be drafted or signed by a sanctioned franchise, the ability to either forego above mentioned military duty or serve as a recruiter with a reserve component, is dependent on the need for officers at time of commission. Refer to DA Form 38-5 for full list of regulations.

DA Form 38-4 is an attachment to the contract and is the regulations that the Department of the Army has recently reviewed and changed, in 2005 mind you.

[ASmith4ever]

Ya, the economy is the worst it's been since basically the Depression, gas prices have soared so high that people can't even afford to get to work, but IT's OK BECAUSE THE IRAQI'S HAVE RUNNING WATER AND HIGH SPEED INTERNET !!

I'm sorry man, I understand in your mind that it is the "noble" thing to do to help these people, but U.S. does not have it's priorities straight.

FIRST THINGS FIRST.

When you've fed your own children and family, THEN you can start talkin' about sharing some with the kids at the end of the block.

It's MY tax dollars, and they aren't being used to MY benefit in any way.

You obviosly missed the whole part about providing jobs and education to the people of Iraq... I would suggest reading it again.

The economy would be bad with or without the war... I am going to take a wild guess and say you have never payed attention to what the economy does over the course of a decade. It fluctuates. Granted there are things that WE can do to help the economy, but it is also dependent on the world economy as well. Think of the U.S. as a business comepeting against other businesses. It will have ups and downs.

Listen, just because you think you have come up with some ignorant reason for the War to be unnecessary, only to find out that you really know very little about what is going on over there because the media is what spins it to portray a headline story instead of the government lying to you, that is no reason to start nitpicking and completely ignoring the valid information.

However, thus far, being ignorant and ignoring the important details seem to be what you do best. In the Army, we are trained to have Attention to Detail and let me tell you, it makes quite the difference in this matter.

By the way, the War in Iraq has also provided jobs for many U.S. citizens, so there goes that theory.

[MR. WEBBER]

so its just a coincidence that bush is an oil guy, and they are making billion dollar profits, every fiscal year, right?? it shocks me that we have to pay so much for gas, when they are making that kind of profits.

[ASmith4ever]

so its just a coincidence that bush is an oil guy, and they are making billion dollar profits, every fiscal year, right?? it shocks me that we have to pay so much for gas, when they are making that kind of profits.

Assumption, not fact. You have no proof of any sort that shows Bush making "billion dollar profits" from oil companies. If this were the case, Bush would have been impeached, an obvious fallacy.

When exactly was Bush ever an oil guy?

He makes plenty of profit by being the President alone.

When are you or SBBound49ers ever going to even make a valid argument? You say things that you know little about regarding the war and then pull crap out of your *** when you realize that what you know isn't correct at all. Desperation at its finest.

I am not asking you to admit your wrong, because that isn't necessarily true. I am just saying that you shouldn't be arguing when you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

[Doomsayer]

Bush is a huge oil guy.

He even got money from Exxon, a little more than a million dollars I believe. He also defended them after their huge revenue influx.

Bush, a former Texas oilman, said of oil costs, "I think that basically the price is determined by the marketplace, and that's the way it should be."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/257887_bush02.html

He gets a cut from major oil companies as long as he spews out the bull**** about the demand being high, so the price is high. Also screwing the middle class worker in the process.

This is also a good read about how powerful Exxon really is in influencing Bush.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2005/jun/08/usnews.climatechange


Also, the economy would not be in the state its in if the war never happened. After Clinton left office the Economy was stable and recording profits. After 2002, it all stopped.

It's really not hard to figure out. I understand that your in the army though and you need to defend your cause and I commend you for that.

[ASmith4ever]

Bush is a huge oil guy.

He even got money from Exxon, a little more than a million dollars I believe. He also defended them after their huge revenue influx.



http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/257887_bush02.html

He gets a cut from major oil companies as long as he spews out the bull**** about the demand being high, so the price is high. Also screwing the middle class worker in the process.

This is also a good read about how powerful Exxon really is in influencing Bush.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2005/jun/08/usnews.climatechange


Also, the economy would not be in the state its in if the war never happened. After Clinton left office the Economy was stable and recording profits. After 2002, it all stopped.

It's really not hard to figure out. I understand that your in the army though and you need to defend your cause and I commend you for that.

I don't think the state of the economy had much to do with Clinto when it was good. In fact, he ignored a number of good economical practices as far as administration goes that prevented the economy from remaining good.

As far as these cuts your talking about from the oil companies, that's called lobbyism, plain and simple. The amount of money he is recieving, even in the sources provided, don't equate anywhere near the billions of dollars that some have claimed.

The economy wouldn't be bad if it weren't for the war????

Do you study history? One of the best things for the economy IS a war.

In your fist article, did you miss this part?

In his address Tuesday night, Bush had set a goal of reducing the nation's Mideast oil imports by 75 percent by 2025.

The second article on the other hand has a misleading title with no support behind it. Yes, the title says Bush is heavily influenced by Exxon and then goes on to now provide any support to argument other than a single quote from the head of Greepeace, who is obviously T'd that the US didn't sign the deal

[Doomsayer]

Clinton may have ignored certain aspects of the economy, but he also brought it to a high point. So maybe he didn't really need them?

I know its called lobbyism, but you can't tell me that he isn't also getting paid under the table. Its a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" deal. At least thats what I'm getting from it.


War is good for the economy when the benefits go directly to us, in this case they are not. I agree though, that once everything is said and done, we should be a booming economy.

I'm not trying to be some anti-american either, I love America. I just don't have to agree with everything thats going on with it right now. I don't want it to seem like a personal attack, its just what I've observed lately.

[ASmith4ever]

Clinton may have ignored certain aspects of the economy, but he also brought it to a high point. So maybe he didn't really need them?

I know its called lobbyism, but you can't tell me that he isn't also getting paid under the table. Its a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" deal. At least thats what I'm getting from it.


War is good for the economy when the benefits go directly to us, in this case they are not. I agree though, that once everything is said and done, we should be a booming economy.

I'm not trying to be some anti-american either, I love America. I just don't have to agree with everything thats going on with it right now. I don't want it to seem like a personal attack, its just what I've observed lately.

Well, I am glad you are seeing it for what it is, but it isn't just Bush in this case. That is politics for you. I have no argument against that. I just like to keep in mind that it isn't only Bush running this country.

I am not necessarily going to agree with this assumption, but some people believe Bush may be an unsung hero by taking the blame for everything that people have to say bad things about in this country.

I look around and, other than a typical dip in the american economy, I see what makes America the most powerful and prestigious country in the world. and then I see all the people that complain about it...

How ungreatful are we?

[Doomsayer]

I think its just because its happening right now, we aren't really concerned with whats happened in the past or the future. It has a direct effect on us now, so were going to complain.

Most don't really realize how lucky they actually are, thats for **** sure. It takes something like this stall to show that, because once it gets back to normal it will be put in perspective.

I think Bush takes the blame because he is the face of the Country, of course we are going to attack our leader when something goes wrong. Its pretty obvious that its not just his doing though.