Bring ROTC back to Harvard and Yale

Starting with protests over the war in Vietnam and continuing through protests over the discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, many of the nation’s most exclusive colleges and universities barred ROTC from their campuses. (You may recall that some conservatives held that against Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan during her confirmation hearings; as the dean of Harvard’s law school, she had argued in favor of the policy.)
It’s time for Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Columbia and those other elite universities to bring back ROTC. Some college presidents — and military officials — have argued that too few students at those top universities would be interested in military careers to make opening an ROTC office cost-effective. From The NYT:

Eileen M. Lainez, a Defense Department spokeswoman, said Monday that it would be “premature to speculate” on plans for new R.O.T.C. units.

Diane H. Mazur, a law professor at the University of Florida and a former Air Force officer, said she doubted whether the military would reinstate the R.O.T.C. at Ivy League colleges because it is expensive to operate there, particularly for the relatively few number of students the services are likely to recruit.

“I think the military is much more persuaded by output, is much more persuaded by economic efficiency,” Ms. Mazur said.

Drew Faust, the president of Harvard, said over the weekend that she was looking forward to “pursuing discussions with military officials and others to achieve Harvard’s full and formal recognition of R.O.T.C..” . .
The Student Affairs Committee of the Columbia University Senate, a policy-making body of students, faculty members, administrators, alumni and others, said Monday that it had formed a Task Force on Military Engagement to consider whether the university should formally participate in the R.O.T.C.

Before making any decision, the committee said, it would conduct an opinion survey and hold hearings on the issue. The committee’s chairman, Tao Tan, said the process would be driven by students, rather than faculty members.

Several Columbia students said this week that while they would not object to the return of the R.O.T.C., they did not expect their classmates to show much interest in military careers.

“Most people come here to have a specific career,” said Alex Gaspard, 18, who hopes to go to law school. “Investment bankers or lawyers.”

Regardless, it is in the nation’s best interest to include among its military officers as many of the best-educated leaders as it can find. And some of those can be harvested from colleges such as Harvard and Yale.
There has been much concern, over recent decades, that the all-volunteer Armed Forces is increasingly different from the civilian nation that it serves — more religious, more conservative. (I’m not so sure that’s true, given the Pentagon’s survey on “Don’t Ask,” which showed that most troops were quite comfortable with having gays and lesbians serve openly.) One of the ways to ameliorate that trend is to be sure that the officer corps is recruited broadly, including recruitment from the elite universities.
— by Cynthia Tucker

360 comments Add your comment

Straight Talk

December 22nd, 2010
9:29 am

MIracles do happen at Christmas. CT is making sense.

granny godzilla

December 22nd, 2010
9:30 am

Fred

You are one of the bright spots here…and I appreciate you.

Perhaps next week I’ll just ask Kayaker or Joel to transcibe my posts
in Republispeak…just for fun.

Good Grief

December 22nd, 2010
9:32 am

markie mark – Charles ended up at the 4077 as a result of cribbage debts, not poker debts

cgatlanta

December 22nd, 2010
9:34 am

Cynthia, your opinion on this really doesn’t matter. It is up to the PRIVATE schools in question.

moddyd

December 22nd, 2010
9:34 am

I talked to some friends who are serving this weekend and they stated that it does not bother them at all. It’s not like all of a sudden boot camps are going to be bathhouses. While the members of the military do tend to be more conservative I think its a more true form of conservative as opposed to right wing bible thumping conservatives that I have grown to dislike and have made me a libertarian.

Joel Edge

December 22nd, 2010
9:35 am

granny godzilla@9:30
“transcibe my posts
in Republispeak…just for fun.”
My mistake, so you don’t support a draft. Just national service. My bad. And how would this national service be implemented. Volunteer? We have that already. Care to elaborate?

Death of the Dollar

December 22nd, 2010
9:37 am

Ha ha ha, fools, the Pentagon is bankrupting America.

TommyJack

December 22nd, 2010
9:38 am

Hell hath frozen over, CT.

WDE

December 22nd, 2010
9:40 am

I don’t disagree on what you are saying, but I think their stance on barring ROTC in the first place is very disturbing.

ctucker

December 22nd, 2010
9:40 am

cgatlanta@9:34, I suppose that applies to every comment on this site

Pablo

December 22nd, 2010
9:40 am

Dan:

I also think that it is a good idea. The problem lies in the need to make the problem cost effective, and therefore viable in these universitites. As long as the liberal academia keeps talking about what they obviously know nothing about, they will keep many young men and women away from what could be a very good career path in their lives.

GT/MIT

December 22nd, 2010
9:41 am

Had it not been for the ROTC program it would never have been possible for a middle Georgia country boy such as I, to attend one of the top rated engineering schools on the planet. It was also the genesis of a long career in aviation, which unfortunately included an interlude in the tropical paradise of Viet Nam, and lated afforded me the opportunity to continue my education at another great institute in the Northeast.

The ROTC program can be a pathway to success for those who might be disadvantaged and so inclined. Not to mention the honor of serving our great country.

ctucker

December 22nd, 2010
9:41 am

alarm@9:24, We’ve already had countless gay and lesbian service members come back in body bags. I suppose your alarm failed to go off when that happened.

Henry

December 22nd, 2010
9:42 am

I can’t believe I agree with Cynthia Tucker on something.

StJ

December 22nd, 2010
9:43 am

The Ivy League snobs used Vietnam and DADT as excuses to bar ROTC from campus, now the excuse is “it’s not cost effective”. If it were to be proven that it is cost effective, they’d come up with another excuse.

Even though I agree with the topic, the fact is that the people in charge of the Ivy League schools hate the military (the same military that protects their little fiefdoms, and the rest of us, from our enemies), plain and simple.

granny godzilla

December 22nd, 2010
9:43 am

Joel

“My mistake, so you don’t support a draft. Just national service.”

This is a perfect example of republispeak.

Never said any such thing.

Why do I waste my time on you Joel?

stands for decibels

December 22nd, 2010
9:44 am

mornin’.

in an ivy league school, [...] all they hear from the mouths of people who would not be able to recognize anything military in nature even if it came and slapped them in the face is that the military is the scum of the earth

I think the presuppositions from some here about what surely must go on at those fancy-pants Ivy League schools is kinda funny.

maybe it’s just me.

Joel Edge

December 22nd, 2010
9:44 am

ctucker@9:40
He’s probably right. I think what matters is the Pentagons opinion. Like your blog said, they’re not interested because of the little return they’ll get in Ivy League colleges.

TnGelding

December 22nd, 2010
9:46 am

Well, it appears to me that OUR military is too busy protecting other countries to be that concerned about us. Hoodlums with box cutters and pirates run amok despite our wasteful spending and emphasis on “national defense.”

TheAtleeAppeal

December 22nd, 2010
9:47 am

CT

Believe it or not, I can agree with you on this. We can only hope that if ROTC programs are put back on these campuses, the extremely anti-military teachers and administrators in the Ivy Leages do not discourage students from joining.

I personally don’t see a problem with anyone volunteering for military service if they are gay. The issue some military commanders brought to the table regarding DODT is that they worried gay servicemen/women would end up being more vocal about their sexual orientation than showing their loyalty strictly to the country they swore to defend. I can kind of see a point in that regard considering how open and in-the-face some gay-rights groups are, but I don’t think it will be much of a problem for the military. Whether you are gay or not, it takes a lot of courage to volunteer for duty.

dw

December 22nd, 2010
9:47 am

cynthia,
now you can spin for more fashionable uniforms. the next great injustice that cynthia will correct.

Joel Edge

December 22nd, 2010
9:47 am

granny godzilla@9:43
And I quote: “I would support a year or two of national service for all.”
Why do you waste your time on me?

Hootinany Yum Yum

December 22nd, 2010
9:47 am

granny godzilla writes at 8:20 am

“What a marvelous idea! A well educated officer corps!

It’s a good thing.”

One can imply from your comment that you believe Cynthia’s op/ed is the first time anyone has considered the idea of a “well educated officer corps,” and that a well educated officer corp can only be achieved by the inclusion of “elite” schools.

Your ignorance, as well as Ms. Tucker’s, never ceases to amaze me.

Granny, you remind me of one of those little Pac-Man images chasing after everything Cynthia posts. Of course, that’s an insult to Pac-Man images everywhere…

I's the One who says when Its Quittin Time at Tara

December 22nd, 2010
9:47 am

All I know is, if the blue bloods have to go to war, there’ll be less wars, can I get a amen from the congregation

markie mark

December 22nd, 2010
9:48 am

aha Good…..I knew he PO an officer playing cards…forgot the game….

TGT

December 22nd, 2010
9:48 am

Let’s bring back the truth about homosexuality:

-A twenty-five to thirty-year decrease in life expectancy

-Extremely promiscuous sexual activity

-20 times more frequent use of methamphetamine

-Primary and secondary syphilis that is more than 46 times that of other men and more than 71 times that of women

-A much higher rate of gonorrhea, various forms of hepatitis, and anal and genital warts

-HIV diagnoses that is more than 44 times that of other men and more than 40 times that of women

-Frequently fatal rectal cancer

-A much higher than usual incidence of suicide

And so on.

TnGelding

December 22nd, 2010
9:48 am

Sexual misconduct of any kind has to be treated the same in the military or any other workplace.

dw

December 22nd, 2010
9:49 am

cynthia,
you already forgot that we have elite universities for officers – Annapolis, West Point, ….

TnGelding

December 22nd, 2010
9:49 am

Uppity Shmuppity

December 22nd, 2010
9:51 am

It’s OK for the ‘Powers that Be’ at these ‘elite’ universities to simply admit they are anti-military (i.e., intolerant) and move on. Their crushing of free speech (in the name of liberalism and diversity) have made that more than apparent. And Ms. Kagan was more or less caught in that lie during confirmation hearings…she gave elusive, namby pamby legalistic answers rather than truthful ones and was careful to never give her reasons for supporting the colleges’ discriminatory actions. But avoiding giving your opinion is one of the whole things about the SCOTUS dance, correct?

Some people might forget that someone who goes through ROTC does not pay for tuition, correct? Wouldn’t that attract some people to (not necessarily “at”) Harvard, Yale, etc.? Those institutions have nothing on Annapolis, West Point, or Colorado Springs, although they might think they do.

Kate De Braose

December 22nd, 2010
9:52 am

George Bush went to Yale, as did his father before him. Not to Harvard.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

December 22nd, 2010
9:52 am

Stands…Leave my fancy pants out of this. I will not have the good name of Faber College brought into the muck.

Douglas C. Neidemeyer

Fred

December 22nd, 2010
9:54 am

TGT

December 22nd, 2010
9:48 am

Let’s bring back the truth about homosexuality:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Could you site that source please? I’ve seen that list twice now and neither time was a source cited.

If that list is true, it “confirms” for me more than ever that homosexuality is not a “choice.” I mean who in the hell would CHOSE those risks? Not to mention the social outcast status that usually goes along with it……………..

TGT

December 22nd, 2010
9:58 am

Sources were referenced before here.

TheAtleeAppeal

December 22nd, 2010
9:59 am

Fred..

People choose to drink and drive, shoot themselves up with heroin, jump off of bridges…etc. Does this confirm to you that nobody choses to do things that everyone knows the risks to?

TGT

December 22nd, 2010
9:59 am

See 6:25 to 6:28 of my above link.

Jimmyd

December 22nd, 2010
10:00 am

Yep, it’s our own Christmas Miracle…I agree with Ms. Tucker on something:-)
Now for the bonus round, what was the previously mentioned Charles Winchester III’s middle name (on MASH)?

james

December 22nd, 2010
10:02 am

granny @ 8:59- I would second that motion. it would go a long way in solving whole lot of issues.

Fred

December 22nd, 2010
10:03 am

dw

December 22nd, 2010
9:49 am

cynthia,
you already forgot that we have elite universities for officers – Annapolis, West Point, ….
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I dunno, I’ve never seen Harvard in the news for a cheating scandal. Can’t say the same thing about West Point or Annapolis. Also you forgot the Air Force Academy. I mean the air force is ALMOST military ………

Joel Edge

December 22nd, 2010
10:05 am

Fred@9:54
“I mean who in the hell would CHOSE those risks?”
Agreed. I would modify that opinion with: who in his right mind…
But I ain’t gonna elaborate.

TGT

December 22nd, 2010
10:07 am

As far as homosexuality “not being a choice,” I hope your not implying that people are “born gay,” i.e. it is genetic.

As Dr. Jeffrey Satinover points out (referencing a 1994 University of Chicago study), “…it is patently false that homosexuality is a uniform attribute across individuals, that it is stable over time, and that it can be easily measured.” Dr. Satinover adds that, “Studies across the globe that have now sampled over 100,000 individuals have found the same. We now know that in the majority of both men and women, ‘homosexuality,’ as defined by any scientifically rigorous criteria, spontaneously tends to ‘mutate’ into heterosexuality over the course of a lifetime.”

These facts support the idea of many that homosexuality is not a genetic and unchangeable behavior. This idea is further supported by the fact that there are, of course, many people who have come out of the homosexual lifestyle. Dr. Satinover continues that, homosexuals are “human beings, no different than you or me, who are, of course, sexual beings. Like you and me, their sexuality is broken in a broken world. The notion that ‘homosexuals’ are in effect a ‘different species’ (different genes) is ludicrous beyond belief. There is not the slightest evidence for that as anyone who actually reads the studies (not reports on the studies) knows.”

Joel Edge

December 22nd, 2010
10:07 am

Fred@10:03
“I mean the air force is ALMOST military ………”
Ouch!. Army veteran?

Fred

December 22nd, 2010
10:07 am

Thanks TGT. I wasn’t suggesting you made it up (it was to definite) I just like to know sources so I can decide if they are reliable. I think we can all agree that the CDC is fairly reliable lol.

Death of the Dollar

December 22nd, 2010
10:08 am

News that has been suppressed: Private Bradley Manning, the traitor who gave away our secrets to wikileaks, is an openly gay service member. Now that is a good reason not to have gays in the military.

The alarm clock is ringing now.WAKE-UP you fools

December 22nd, 2010
10:09 am

The gay and lesbian members in body bags were not out in the open. Now theuy will be. I bet you will never hear the news tell you that. It will not take long untill the military gay pride groups start wanting their rights and protections. You will never see the gay pride marches behind the hearst. It want take long, untill we have congressional hearings about using more gay people in battle than streight people. I do not car one way or the other about gays in the military, just like I was on women rights. If they want to do it, if the can, let them. We are all just a bag of skin and bones waiting to be turned into worm food anyway. It what you do with that bag of skin and bones that matters. In 100 years we all will be just history anyway.

Joel Edge

December 22nd, 2010
10:11 am

Death of the Dollar@10:08
“News that has been suppressed”
Not that suppressed. Coulter had an article on it. It buzzed on my old units group for a while.

lupe

December 22nd, 2010
10:12 am

I’m proud of my adopted Country. We just became a more tolerant nation with the repeal of DADT and the military can add fierce to their lexicon.

Fred

December 22nd, 2010
10:13 am

Joel Edge: :)

TGT: When did YOU choose to be heterosexual?

godless heathen

December 22nd, 2010
10:13 am

Fred

December 22nd, 2010
10:15 am

Death of the Dollar; Either you don’t get out much or you aren’t too bright. The ‘news” that Manning is gay is old hat. Unless I’m mistaken, it was the REASON he gave for being a traitor. DADT.