We Want You Even if You're Getting Old

Message

oldnslo · #1 Unread post by **oldnslo** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:06 pm

US military reserve and national guard recruiters have announced a change in one of their requirements for acceptance, due to failing to meet recruitment goals in 2004 and an even worse performance so far this year.
Now, if you wish to join, and don't mind the certainty of being shipped out to Iraq, they will accept you if you are up to 39 years of age. Previously, 34 was the oldest acceptable.
I figure by the time they get to my age group [63], the war might be over or I will have left this world via some other means.....

#2 Unread post by **9000white** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:41 pm

one benefit we senior citizen soldiers have in our favor is we probably wont have to endure the rigors of basic training.they will just ship us over and use us as cannon fodder.

oldnslo · #3 Unread post by **oldnslo** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:52 pm

Your only piece of gear will be a catcher's mitt......

#4 Unread post by **Sev** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:00 pm

Seems to me it would be more efficient to equip you with a giant flashing sign that says, "don't shoot, I'm old!"
If they can read english they might hesitate and you can use hit em with that standard issue bendy stick you've been equiped with.

I suggest excessive flailing.

Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:55 pm

That's interesting (the age change) as I wonder if they will start accepting younger people too?

Maybe 16 year olds?

Mike.

#6 Unread post by **9000white** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:42 pm

what would it take to get the senators and congressmen to go????

oldnslo · #7 Unread post by **oldnslo** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:50 pm

A personal appearance by God. Maybe. And even then they would hire someone to take their place. They are too valuable to go to war, you know.

#8 Unread post by **9000white** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:10 pm

hmmm..i would place their value just below second hand toilet paper.

rdeviney · #9 Unread post by **rdeviney** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:09 pm

The Democrats’ mistake was in thinking that a disastrous war, national bankruptcy, erosion of liberties, corporate takeover of government, environmental destruction, squandering of our economic and moral leadership in the world, and systematic lying by the Administration would be of concern to the electorate. The Republicans correctly saw that the chief concern of the electorate was to keep gay couples from having an abortion. [Wish I'd written that, but got it in an email from a friend.]

oldnslo · #10 Unread post by **oldnslo** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 8:52 pm

Whatever it was, it was an effective selling of a bill of goods. Textbook hoodwinking.