America is a land of immigrants. Their spirit of resolve, adventure, hard work and devotion to an idea bigger than themselves has made this country great. Whatever one thinks of the immigration debate today, particularly the problem of illegal immigrants, foreigners have played a central role in the building of America. Many have done so as soldiers, among them Baron von Steuben and the Marquis de Lafayette in the War of Independence.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/03/2552879

I have now heard the ultimate in outsourcing proposals. Uncle Sam needs you. Join the 2007 New Age Hessian Infantry Brigade today!

I think it's a great idea and a way for immigrants to prove they want to be soldiers. However foreigners can already join the army pretty easily and its an accelerated way to citzenship.

OTOH, the Romans ultimately contracted out their military responsibilities. Little good it did them.

Since 1973, when the draft ended and the U.S. military became an all-volunteer force, the military has increasingly reflected the country's diversity. But it still struggles with aspects of that diversity. Demands on military personnel have increased in recent years including more frequent deployments and more dangerous missions the military has had to respond to greater dissatisfaction within the ranks.

Minorities have made some gains among enlisted personnel but only small gains among officers. African Americans are underrepresented in the officer ranks, compared with their share of enlisted personnel or the civilian labor force.

So having immigrants serve in the military in exchange of their citizenship is a great idea, not only will solve the problem of immigration but also will solve the current recruiting problem that the military is so wrongly trying to hide. The military is set to increase their numbers by the year 2012 but it is known that the Brass in Washington want the goal to be met faster than that. So having immigrants filling that gap will be the best answer for both problems, immigration and military growth and recruitment.

Maybe it worked for the French two centuries ago; but "the times, they have a changed". Even the French had to abandon the idea of colonialism and global empire at some point, eh?

There are good and sensible reasons that we are having trouble recruiting. Those reasons are obvious.

Contrary to the opinion of some of the folks at "the top". You really can't "fool all the people, all the time".

There are hard limits to how much well seasoned bull**** people can be fed before they start vomiting in disgust.

If we were to actually implement the foreign legion fantasy it would give a whole new dimension to the term "sleeper cell".

It's bad enough that at least a third of our "men at arms" in Iraq are off budget mercenaries/private contractors. (who, btw aren't bound by military codes/rules/honor)

These policies/practices are simply not sustainable in a democracy.

We need a strong capable military; but it must be one that serves the high ideals upon which this great nation was founded.

If history teaches us anything it is that, "No amount of military might can make what is wrong, right".

Boot's proposal touches on three issues: Undo***ented immigrants; Deteriorating military; and the quagmire in Iraq. His idea is clearly good for the first two, as Rios indicates. Not sure about the third.

It is empahtically not "pretty easy" for foreigners to join the US military. A green card is required as Boot mentions. If getting a green card were "pretty easy" we would not have 11 million immigrants with no green cards. Among other problems, there is a 4-5 year wait.

Perhaps the first two problems could be greatly alleviated by just changing the law to allow foreigners to enlist without green cards. Issue a green card in exchange for enlisting. Then the Army could set up large recruitment offices in Jaurez and Tijuana. Include medical and aptitude testing rooms. Go to the center several times; get your papers; get on the bus. Maybe even offer ESL classes.

Regarding Iraq, maybe we should give the UN a hundred billion dollars a year to send some kind of peacekeeping force to Iraq. We are presently spending more than that in money and lives. Yes, yes, the UN is dysfunctional and near worthless, but what else? Read Professor Fujiyama's new editorial about the horrific prospects for Iraq.

The pessimistic professor's name is Fukuyama. His opinion was published 2007 May 5 in the LA Times.
-- Harry Wertmuller

America needs those who needs America!