Haha. Took up for me? I was stating what I knew on a subject of interest and posting links for her to continue her own research if she were so inclined. I was not making assinine blanket statements for the sole purpose of creating animosity. Don't sweat "taking up for" me, sport.
Go ahead and try to defend what you said with evidence. You cannot do it. Your statements are untrue, unfounded, and idiotic.
Sport? Where the hell did you come up with that? That sounds like something a couple of ivy league frat guys from the 40's would call each other. "Well done sport." Good show old man." "Let's go to Buffy's summer cottage for a game of croquet."
Anyway, I digress. Back to your assertion about lack of evidence. There may be some bad news for you. I found some evidence. Not much though really. It's just a reference to a report for the DoD thrown together by a few professors. But, what the hell do professors know anyway? It's not like they use scientifically gathered data to draw conclusions or anything. It really didn't take to long for me to find this evidence either. With the right Google search term, "reasons for enlistment," it was the sixth link listed. Here's an excerpt and the link. I've underlined portions of the text that may be of particular interest to you: The sophistication of the recruitment process becomes painstakingly clear when reading Attitudes, Aptitudes, and Aspirations of American Youth: Implications for Military Recruitment (2003), a text compiled by the Committee on the Youth Population and Military Recruitment (CYPMR). This committee, established by the National Research Council in 1999 in response to a request by the DoD, is a think tank composed of academics from the Universities of Minnesota, Michigan, California at Los Angeles, and Pennsylvania (among others) who analyze dynamics of recruitment including: gender and race, education and aptitude, physical and moral attributes, military life and working conditions, and values impacting enlistment decisions. These researchers have expertise in demography, military manpower, military sociology, psychology, adolescent development, economic advertising, communication, and private sector management. To compile this text for military policy makers and recruiters, CYPMR utilized DoD documentation, three national youth-based surveys, locally based cross-sectional studies, as well as information from the National Center for Education Statistics and the Defense Manpower Data Center. The primary goal of the authors was to understand why the military has experienced a recruitment downturn; forecast future military manpower requirements, future demographic characteristics of youth, and youth attitudes toward militarism; and finally to make recommendations so the DoD can meet its recruitment goals.
Several trends and recommendations mentioned in this text have direct importance for countering military recuitment. The DoD, which is the largest employer in the nation, must successfully recruit 200,000 new recruits each year to maintain a military force of 1.2 million. According to the CYPMR, the cohort of available 18-year-olds is expected to increase from 3.9 million (1999) to 4.4 million by 2009. However, the population distribution is not expected to stay constant. Whites will experience a decrease in their percentage of the population (from 66% to 57%), Latinos will jump from 14% to 22%, while blacks will remain steady at 14%. The CYPMR noted that the greatest threat to recruitment among these groups will be a stark increase in college attendance resulting from the influence of parents with college degrees and few high-paying jobs available for those without a college degree. While whites will experience a great increase in college attainment, the CYPMR noted that blacks and Latinos will not experience much increase in college attainment. This means the projected recruitment market will ultimately be heavily brown and black youth. Furthermore, recruiters will increasingly target college campuses to attract potential college "stop outs" and dropouts. Many times these are lower-income youth who take time off of school to work to pay for tuition or youth who received a poor k-12 education. Recruiters will also be emphasizing the "money for college" offered by the military. But this is deceiving since 65% of youth who enter the military do not receive a degree from a four-year institution and many enlistees never receive any educational benefits at all.http://www.comdsd.org/article_archive/SteppingUpRecruitment04.htm
Apparently a few college professors relied upon by the DoD seem to agree with me. I suppose their findings are untrue, unfounded and idiotic too, right?