# Want to join the U.S. Military?  That may become reality again .....



## MAJOR_Baker (26 Dec 2006)

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/12/26/military_considers_recruiting_foreigners/ 

Seems like it might be a good idea, has been done before.


----------



## Sham (26 Dec 2006)

Now if only Canada did this as well.


----------



## GO!!! (26 Dec 2006)

Sounds like a good idea to me - and just the kinds of citizens both the US and Canada require.

Funny that these "officials" deride the use of foreigners, but only one in six hundred of them are willing to do the job themselves.


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (26 Dec 2006)

start handing out pay raises and then we'll talk!  ;D

If this were 4 years ago, id really be considering it... but the green maple leaf machine already owns me lol


----------



## Red 6 (26 Dec 2006)

This is an extreme measure that basically says, "We cannot sustain our armed forces with our own citizenry." My my opinion, there are many interim steps that need to be hit before we open our ranks to recruitment of foreigners. Here are a few of them as examples:

1) full mobilization of the Guard and reserves.
2) reinstatement of a partial/full draft
3) use of the IRR and retired reserve to a larger extent for targeted shortages in critical MOS's.
4) Streamline the process for reserve Soldiers who want to augment into active duty. 

I'm sick and tired of a war where the government keeps saying, We're at war," but a fraction of a minority are doing the fighting and dying. This is the fourth Christmas since 9-11 and it sickens me to see the malls filled to the bursting point with people who could care less that Americans are in a war.
If this is the "struggle of our time" we need to stop using it as an advertisement and make it reality. Our government is framing this as a fight against good and evil, not some small war on the periphery.

I realize that foreigners have performed valuable service to the US. But these service members served in wars where the draft was in effect, as during the Vietnam War, and in the Civil War and the World Wars, where the entire nation was mobilized.

The bigger question is, "Who is supposed to pay the price for our wars?" My answer is "Americans."


----------



## Douke (26 Dec 2006)

Historically, large empires have used sizeable quantities of foreign troops to achieve their military goals (Napoleonian France and Roman Empire for example) with very mixed results. It is a valid recruiting tactic, in my opinion, but one to be used with caution and in last resort. There is currently, as been pointed out, a large number of troops idle in Canada, who could be deployed with a refresher and pre-deployment training. If we really decide we need a larger military (wich I doubt, I would rather buy better equipment for what we already have, and keep betting on quality rather then quantity), there are numbers of possible avenues we can explore before getting to "importing soldiers".

Douke


----------



## CougarKing (26 Dec 2006)

Sorry to sound like a troll, but doesn't this thread belong here:

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/28732.0.html

The issue of allowing individual non-resident foreigners into the US military is related to the issue of creating a US Foreign Legion.


----------



## Trinity (26 Dec 2006)

sounds like starship troopers

Service equals citizenship


And there is nothing wrong with that IMO


----------



## tomahawk6 (26 Dec 2006)

I recomended this almost 2 years ago.Proof that decision making moves at a glacial pace.


----------



## GAP (26 Dec 2006)

I don't think it's a bad thing....I immigrated, served my time in the USMC, and came home. Other than some teasing,  no problem. I had my choice to apply for American citizenship, but at that time they would not allow dual citizenship, so I declined.


----------



## CougarKing (26 Dec 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> I don't think it's a bad thing....I immigrated, served my time in the USMC, and came home. Other than some teasing,  no problem. I had my choice to apply for American citizenship, but at that time they would not allow dual citizenship, so I declined.



GAP,

I am a little confused about something. You said " I don't think it's a bad thing". What are you referring to when you say "it"? The very act of serving the US military even if it's not your home country? Or the long, unreasonable immigration process one goes through just to get a greencard through work sponsorship? (well those who marry get their greencards from USCIS/formerly INS faster). I just wanted to clarify what you meant by the statement. Happy Holidays to you!

CougarKing


----------



## GAP (26 Dec 2006)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> GAP,
> 
> I am a little confused about something. You said " I don't think it's a bad thing". What are you referring to when you say "it"? The very act of serving the US military even if it's not your home country? Or the long, unreasonable immigration process one goes through just to get a greencard through work sponsorship? (well those who marry get their greencards from USCIS/formerly INS faster). I just wanted to clarify what you meant by the statement. Happy Holidays to you!
> 
> CougarKing



I did not require a green card to serve in the military, only if  I got out and wanted to live and work in the US. I could have applied for one, but had no desire to.


----------



## CougarKing (26 Dec 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> I did not require a green card to serve in the military, only if  I got out and wanted to live and work in the US. I could have applied for one, but had no desire to.



GAP,

I'm sorry but I don't understand. It's in the regulations a foreign citizen must be a greencardholder or also possess US citizenship in order to serve in the US military nowadays. How did a Canadian like you join the US military WITHOUT a GREENCARD? I don't think you mentioned here you were a dual US/Canadian citizen.

I just want some clarification- better yet we can clarify this in the chatroom right now if you want instead of muddling a nice thread. Happy Holidays!

CougarKing


----------



## GAP (26 Dec 2006)

It was not a requirement when I joined. I simply immigrated to the US, the USMC guaranteed my care and custody for one year, and I was good to go.


----------



## schart28 (26 Dec 2006)

You served in Vietnam? In those days it was different.



			
				GAP said:
			
		

> It was not a requirement when I joined. I simply immigrated to the US, the USMC guaranteed my care and custody for one year, and I was good to go.


----------



## CougarKing (26 Dec 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> It was not a requirement when I joined. I simply immigrated to the US, the USMC guaranteed my care and custody for one year, and I was good to go.



GAP,

Oh yeah, you joined during the Vietnam War-sorry if I didn't read your profile- when the regulations were less stringent for foreigners joining. I see. But you must be well aware then that only greencardholder foreigners and those foreigners who also hold US citizenship are the only ones who can join nowadays? Thanks for your replies and for your Vietnam service. Happy Holidays!


----------



## tomahawk6 (26 Dec 2006)

If a foreigner becomes a citizen, he is no longer a foreigner. ;D
Existing law allows for corporations to sponsor employees for a green card. This is the law that DoD could also use to recruit foreign born persons for employment in the military.


----------



## ThainC (26 Dec 2006)

Hrm... I looked into getting into the US Army for some time, but with no DIRECT relatives, and no corporation about to sponsor me, no luck.  Since then, I've been patiently awaiting my job offer.  Wished the rules were a little different, as in to include Canada in the I-551 Diversity Lottery or something like that.


----------



## observor 69 (26 Dec 2006)

This whole issue is to laugh! The Western world is in a competition to attract the best people to immigrate to their country.  Demographics show that most countries, Canada included, are in a neutral or negative population growth. The most valuable commodity today that a country can posess is  the brain power, intelligence and talent of it's people. The US and Canada only stand to gain from attracting the best and brightest of immigrants. Of course there should be entry requirements but for the US or Canada to recruit foreigners only makes good demographic sense.


----------



## CougarKing (26 Dec 2006)

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> This whole issue is to laugh! The Western world is in a competition to attract the best people to immigrate to their country.  Demographics show that most countries, Canada included, are in a neutral or negative population growth. The most valuable commodity today that a country can posess is  the brain power, intelligence and talent of it's people. The US and Canada only stand to gain from attracting the best and brightest of immigrants. Of course there should be entry requirements but for the US or Canada to recruit foreigners only makes good demographic sense.



Baden,

Having unsuccessfuly tried to immigrate to the United States myself when I was studying there on a student visa, I don't think this issue is amusing at all. I'd like you to point to a link to any of the figures that show that America has a "neutral or negative population growth". Otherwise I don't  necessarily agree that your statement applies to America.

CougarKing


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (27 Dec 2006)

...and if anyone wishes to respond to the abortion issue.....don't do it in this thread. forum.


----------



## observor 69 (27 Dec 2006)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Baden,
> 
> Having unsuccessfully tried to immigrate to the United States myself when I was studying there on a student visa, I don't think this issue is amusing at all. I'd like you to point to a link to any of the figures that show that America has a "neutral or negative population growth". Otherwise I don't necessarily agree that your statement applies to America.
> 
> CougarKing



Well first let me extend my sympathies to you ref trying to immigrate to the US. I can sympathize as I know of many degreed nurses, being married to one,  who have returned to Canada, giving up in frustration with the US Immigration Services. This at a time when their employer US hospital is literally begging them to stay. 
Also let me say that, yes, I got carried away in my general statement ref population growth. As you are well aware the US is facing a challenging problem with population growth whereas in Canada we are dependent on immigration for population growth.

But in my defence I am trying to isolate my discussion to those immigrants of professional qualification that are of great value to the economies of a country. Living in the Toronto area I see the tried old problem of foreign trained doctors and other professionals delivering pizza etc.

So my point is both the US and Canada must concentrate on attracting, and retaining, foreign professionals. The US is not admitting as many professionals as it has in the past decades and manypay a price in R&D for this . Canada is competing on a world stage for these highly trained immigrants while both the Indian and Chinese economies are picking up. In Toronto we have a new phenomena occurring. Foreign professionals who immigrated to Canada are leaving their families here and finding employment in other countries such as Bahrain and Dubai. Some are just returning to India/China as well as their Canadian educated children.

To tie back to the thread on foreigners in the military, if we can attract quality immigrants to our military all the better for Canada.


----------



## Yrys (27 Dec 2006)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> ...and if anyone wishes to respond to the abortion issue.....don't do it in this thread.



I did 

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/55143.0.html

Édith : http://Forums.Army.ca/forums/threads/55143.0


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (27 Dec 2006)

...and its been removed. On sober second thought there are lots of other forums for that discussion, not this militarily themed one.

Not your fault, my initial post wasn't clear enough.


----------



## CougarKing (27 Dec 2006)

S_Baker said:
			
		

> My post is not about creating separate units (i.e. Hessians) it was about allowing the foreign born to join the U.S. military as warriors not as mercenaries, and if they want they can become citizens.  As I have said before this is nothing new.  It was a law until spring 1968.



S Baker,

When you said "mercenaries", you were implying that the real French Foreign Legion are mercenaries when they are in fact very professional and one of the world's most respected military units, even if they take in non-French citizens without going through the normal French immigration process. Thus, the same goes for the idea of a US Foreign Legion- they won't be "mercenaries" if it was ever created, they will be soldiers as their US citizen brethren in other regular US units.

I pointed out this other link about a possible US Foreign Legion because it still deals with the idea of recruiting Non-greencard holder/non-resident foreigners into the US military.

Here's the US Foreign Legion thread again:

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/28732.0.html


Just because this new thread deals with inducting non-resident foreigners individually doesn't make it a totally seperate issue. Well anyways, whether it's inducting them individually or in seperate Legionnare units, it makes no difference for me as long as fight for Old Glory/the Red, White and Blue.

CougarKing


----------



## SLUFEOD (28 Dec 2006)

As I am new to this forum let me post that I am a USMC veteran, now a middle aged man who worked as a contractor in Iraq in the past two out of three years. The discussion you all put forth is great, nice to see intelligent discussion of this subject (wouldn't count on that within that white building where our congress congregates anytime soon).

My Grandfather joined the US Army in WW2 from Malta and served, whereupon he was granted citizenship some time after the conclusion of hostilities (I don't have all the details). As America has historically been home to people from all over the world there is no reason whatsoever for not allowing qualified foreigners to enter and serve within the US military. Certainly the ability to vet and investigate any person already exists so that is not a reason to hesitate. Further, as the comment about people in the malls at Christmas time is accurate, it doesn't reflect the fact that all during the 90's the US military discarded many serving personnel for a variety of reasons, including paying incentives for early retirements and outright departures (this was the peace dividend from the end of the cold war). After September 11th, 2001 in the dark days that followed the US government, orated through our President, told people that the best contribution they could make for their country in this troubled time was to go out, shop, live as normally as possible and spend money (spur the economy). Nobody mentioned a need for more robust armed forces (in fact the Secretary of Defense was continuing to eye cuts and make them happen).

So now the US is suffering from lack of direction in reshaping the military following the end of the cold war and Desert Storm. This isn't new, this has happened many times in the US, but today's citizen is not as dedicated to service (on the average) as they were. Certainly the lack of draft puts less pressure on young people to serve and to be honest most who can choose college tend to enter it, rather then enter armed service (obviously not in all cases, but in general that is much more prevalent). Young people from less economically capable families tend to enter service, strictly a market driven principle. However there are many other opportunities generally available to young people now then 30-70 years ago, more lucrative, etc... and the incentives of being a good citizen do not seem to appeal as much to those at the age to enter service (17-24).

In my time in Iraq I found many US Soldiers well over 45 years old, Reservists, Guardsman, etc... So the overall loss of a flood of people to serve isn't such a surprise when looking at so many of the issues. It is sad, that in a time of building crisis, our young people do not want to flock to service, but after all there are many of us that have built the US to what it is today. And when few children of our "ruling class" are serving, the effects are felt much less deeply by those with the most influence to effect changes.

I welcome the idea of foreign nationals serving in the US armed forces in much greater number, though I do not believe in the creation of a "Foreign Legion" for the US. Integration has always tended to be more the norm for us (if we don't look too far back anyway) and would serve us better now, I think. Toughening the qualifications for particular service components or specialties may be necessary, but I do think that we can find ways to manage that whole concept without undue strain to the system. It is a sad commentary that the US would find less then adequate support from it's citizenry, but it is now a much more global world, and changes are always inevitable.

The irony for me is I was looking at potentially serving in the Canadian Armed Forces as a potential route to immigration up north (personal reasons) however I may have to drop some pounds and go see my local recruiter now. Thank you all for having this forum, it is a breath of fresh air on the internet.

Semper Fi,

Sean (SLUFEOD Short Little Ugly Fella Explosive Ordnance Disposal)


----------



## old fart (28 Dec 2006)

"SEMPER FI -Sean (SLUFEOD Short Little Ugly Fella Explosive Ordnance Disposal)"

Gunny Sean, there can only be one Gunny SLUF, gee's it's been a while.  Thanks now my nightmares will return.  
Imagine you turning up on Army.ca.  PM (private message me ) and I will let you know who this is.  

"CHIMO", AIRBORNE....

You should have narrowed it down to two by now....

Old fart out...

PS. You may have inserted Fella, into SLUF, but to us it's F_ck.


----------

