So USA Today — our nation's high school paper — ran a piece noting that dozens of cities with populations over 100,000 haven't lost a service member in the Iraq War.
Experts suggested that recruits probably come from less-populated areas with crummier economies, so their career choices are limited — unlike big cities, where jobs at strip clubs make military service unnecessary.
But, oddly enough, the cities with the most dead? New York City, Houston and San Antonio — which aren't rural at all. I bet they even have cool jobs there, like editing newspapers!
Aside from making no sense at all, the paper seems to be saying that people enlist because they have no choice, not because they are patriotic. The reason is one of desperation, never of conviction.
I don't agree. But even if I did, so what if the military offers a better future? It certainly beats hanging on a corner in Oakland, Baltimore or Detroit. My guess is you'd have a better chance getting shot there than in Bagdad.
Finally, let's imagine what USA Today headlines might have been like in 1944. How about: "Top 10 Reasons Invading Normandy Is a Bad Idea" or "Berkeley Professors Urge Americans to Start Learning German."
I bet they would all come with colorful pie charts.
And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than Hitler!