why would the US military even waste time and money setting up an office there? they MUST be hard up for recruits!

I find it rather ridiculous and UTTERLY disrespectful to the men and women who choose to serve our nation. While I am not a supporter of the war and hope for a speedy resolution, I do not think the the Berkeley City Council had any right to encourage and provoke citizens to protest the marines (as they had said in their first resolution). It's disrespectful, and I can't believe that the city council actually thought it was a good idea. I understand Berkeley is opposed to the war, but it's not right to actively provoke citizens into hindering them. If people choose to serve in the army, it's their decision, and the Marine recruitment office gives them the option. It's not as if they're drafting or kidnapping people off the street and forcing them to serve in the army. Honestly, I'm angry and in disbelief that the Berkeley City Council had the audacity to do something so stupid and disrespectful.

Even though I probably would not want my children to join the military, I still think it's their right to be there. As is an anti-war demonstration to be there.

I have family in the military, and I respect what they do and that they went into the military because that was their choice, and they were AWARE of their choice - in a time prior to only 25% of those recruited with the G.I. Bill actually receiving benefits, when recruiters didn't lie to potential recruits. Now, I absolutely oppose military recruitment. If it were done honestly, I would not, but the sad truth of the matter is that recruiters have quotas to fill and the military is desperate for new recruits, so they resort to lying to poor youth all over the country in order to fill these quotas.

It's a sad day when 18 year old's are being recruited because they think they'll get money for college, and end up having to face reality after 8 years of not receiving a dime.

Ugh, I don't even know if my vote registered properly. I've got to stop voting from the "mysugar" page until the bug is fixed.

This should get the states-righters and federalist-liberatarians up in arms, given that this is an attempt of the federal govt to interfere with a local govt.

BTW, I think the manner in which this poll was phrased is less than objective CitizenSugar.

Hi ktownpolarbear! I did wrestle with the choices--and since I knew there was going to be a broad swath of opinions, I wanted to make sure there was a spot to register your own views. How would you like to have seen the choices worded? I chose trying to be sensitive to both sides, so I'm interested in your idea!

Well, in case anyone didn't see this coming, I'm going to throw in my two-cents:

This is a very interesting scenario and I'll try and keep my thoughts as clear as possible, but there are a lot of overlapping issues here. So on we go....

Yes, the council has a right to pass the resolution if they want to. Personally, I completely disagree with it on many levels, but yes they have the right. I particularly feel this would be a slightly different issue if people were being drafted, but as we are still in a voluntary state, I really feel this is wrong and disrespectful.

What I find amusing about the situation is that after they passed this resolution, there were people in Washington looking to take away Federal funding to Berkley, and the University, that I don't believe should exist anyway. (This is not just for Berkley, but carries over to multiple areas I believe the Federal Government does not have the right to do.) So I find it very ironic that the Federal Government is proposing the concept of taking away something that I don't believe should exist in the first place.

Last, I find it very ironic that everyone feels soooooo passionately about this topic until money comes into play. Once it seemed they might loose money, they flipped their decision on a 7-2 vote. As they couldn't have their cake and eat it too, they decided to take the money and let their passion on the topic go to the side.

This really upset me when I heard about it. But then I thought about the Marines and the laughter they would get out of reading the letter, and it suddenly made everything alright. The US Marines could care less what the tree huggers of Be-serkly, CA think about them.

I lived in Berkeley — and never once hugged a tree — for four years and I recently had to have dinner with a member of the US army. I wasn't quick to judge him, but the second he heard that I attended Berkeley he treated me totally disrespectfully and quite rudely. Thus I feel this judgment goes both ways.

mina - not all branches are hard up for recruits, in fact marine recruiting has consistently made their goals since the war started, now the army on the other hand... well, different story. but i don't think most recruiters lie, i think most are honest and the bad apples get the media attention for reasons i think we all know.

i know a lot of people who get into the military for the education money and then really enjoy their jobs and just decide to forgo filing the paperwork, etc, necessary for the benefit. like most things in the military, if you want something, you have to seek it out, it won't be handed to you on a silver platter.

the berkley issue really fired me up because of the ignorance of it all. are they not aware that the usmc does more than fight wars? they provide embassy security, base security, and HUMANITARIAN aid! Yes. Humanitarian aid. Marines have supported rescue and relief efforts in all corners of the world, yet berkley seems to think they are just war mongers. The ignorance is appalling but not surprising.

piper you make me laugh out loud!

I think the city should have stood by their politics if they really felt passionately about it. It seems silly to me. If recruits are influenced by their community they would not get recruited anyway. I also think the idea to refuse funding to UC Berkeley (as has been suggested) based on this issue is ridiculous since most UCB students aren't even from the surrounding community and the UC is under the guidance of the state provost. It is a research university and when you get to the graduate level that does most of the research the students don't have time to be politically involved with these types of shenanigans. Have you been inside the Lawrence labs (sponsored by the US Dept of Energy) and met with the researchers? If so, you know what I mean.

My only question is why did Berkeley choose to kick out the Marines now? Why not, say, in 2002? Or 2000? I think their action confuses the Armed Services with the Iraq War. While I'm completely against the war and always have been, I have a respect and appreciation for people who are willing to serve and believe that recruiting, just like protesting, should be allowed anywhere. Like ktownpolarbear mentioned, if there were a draft, things might be very different.

Thanks, Cakebaker! I'm off to find something to wear to my husband's Warrant Officer Candidate graduation. It's hard but I HAVE to have dinner with him every night. Hopefully I'll make it through this graduation without getting physically ill due to close proximity of people in the military. Have a great day!

I was going to comment, but I think you adequately handled the situation piper.....

here's a question i've often thought about and can't seem to answer... why is that we used to have such huge respect for our armed forces (think of in the 40s and 50s when parents would love for their daughters to marry a military man and it was almost espect for men to join some branch of the forces for a while) and now it seems like that has eroded incredibly?

i know most people still have great respect for our military, but it seems like most parents don't want their kids to join, don't see it as a source of pride any more, and i can't imagine there are a lot of women who want to marry a man in uniform over one who isn't.... what caused the shift?

cabaker27 - great points in all comments. As for your last comment, I think it's the nature of recent wars, where the country turns against the conflict (Vietnam, Iraq) vs. the wars or our parents' and grandparents' generations where everyone believed we were doing the right thing (WWII).

Congrats to you and your husband Piper! Thats a big accomplishment!

Interesting point Silly! I often wonder if the press was allowed access to those wars like they were in Vietnam, if we really would have been on the same page. We will never know!

The city doesn't have a right to tell a military branch to leave. I find that disrespectful. If you don't agree with something then don't go near it and don't participate.

now i have to do more research when i get time, cause i want to know if in changing their position, the council of Berkley also revoked the special parking permit that they issued to code pink to make it easier for them to protest.

As far as the issue goes, I think that Berkley is well within their rights to do what they can to restrict the marines. Without being a constitutional lawyer, I would think that there would be good grounds for the Federal government to fight those restrictions in court. It is the constitutional duty of the fed to maintain an army after all.

I also think that the members of the Berkley city council or whatever it is, should be reviled by all the citizens of this country for their pathetic attempt at making their statement at the expense of the Marines who have been stationed there.

I'm also sure that those marines could care less and find it humorous. I know I would.

"As far as the issue goes, I think that Berkley is well within their rights to do what they can to restrict the marines. Without being a constitutional lawyer, I would think that there would be good grounds for the Federal government to fight those restrictions in court. It is the constitutional duty of the fed to maintain an army after all."

Very nicely put Arthur. I feel I was very long winded and unfocused in attempting to reach a similar point.

Those protesters should remember how they got, and how they maintain their freedom of speech and right to protest.

...And I little shout out to myself, I posted this on Conservative Sugar yesterday.

I never said I was humble

i'm all for anti-war protests and efforts but war is a part of these ruined times we live in and we need our military spread out in as many places as possible to recruit those patriots wanting to fight for the good and betterment of this country.

Jeez, Piper. Don't you think you were being rude there?

The military has every right to set up recruitment offices anywhere they choose, and the people have every right to voice their opinion about it, but they should not have been asked to leave like that, it's not exactly tolerant. I don't see why there has to be this ridiculous and pointless divide between people who hate war and what the military does with itself and the people who support them. I am personally of the opinion that the military does a lot of f*cked up things they should have to answer to the people for, and I don't support them 100%, but I also *know* they are necessary and do a lot of good for the world. Quite honestly I think such extreme points of view are immature and unbending to the way the world works.

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. The Marines don't have that problem." -President Ronald Reagan, 1985

Mymellowman, thats for you!

Semper Fi:) My vote goes to the Marines.

If the city wants them to leave, and I mean the city, not just the people on the council, then thats fine. However, the federal government then has the right to remove the funds that were given to the city and associated tax benefits.

Congrats to your hubby Piper, and good luck finding something to wear.

what are they afraid that some of their children might actually want to defend their countries and be US Marines? afraid their children might not agree with their veiws and want to serve their country???

Cabaker - You Rock!

Well, first off I'll say that recruiters aren't selling anything they haven't already bought.

As far as whether or not cities have the right to evict recruiters, that's really fascinating. On the one hand, I do believe cities and states should have more rights to govern their citizens as they see fit. On the other hand, the federal armed forces protect the entire country, Berkeley included. There's no real way for Berkeley to forfeit that in exchange for evicting the forces themselves.

I will say, though, that I'm always suspicious of anyone who wants to shut down things they disagree with. If the people of Berkeley truly believe that no one in their midst wants anything to do with the war, what do they really care if recruiters are there?

Partysugar, of course the judgment goes both ways. Members of the armed forces are only human. Why would you expect perfection from them while excusing intolerance from civilians?

Another things that bothers me is when people say things like "its not that we are against the marines, we're just against their job".. as the sister of a Marine who was stationed in Iraq, who saw his friends die, and almost died himself, a guy who was sent back injured, was awarded the purple heart, and has since been working on recovering so he can go back... I have to say Marines are the job. It is the job of a marine to do what they are told no questions asked, and to do it as well as possible.

if you are against the job you are against the marines because they are the job

esk - a big thank you to your brother and to you for supporting him!

i think what you're saying kinda goes hand in hand with the "i don't support the war, but i support the troops" people, i've never really believed you can be 100% against the war and 100% for the troops, esp because most of the troops believe in the war efforts and that they are doing a good thing.

sometimes i feel like the people who are so far left and anti-war go and do things that "support the troops" only so they can say they did when people call their patriotism into question.

I worry about the idea of mixing issues - federal funding for education, say, with the federal govt recruiting. I think we head down a road that just gets uglier and uglier. Issues should be decided on their own merits, and blackmail with something unrelated should not be the answer. I think there can be a valid debate over what role the federal govt has in education, but it is unrelated to the role the fed govt has with military recruitment. This was not a quid pro quo to begin with and should not be now. If we allow the fed govt to dictate every little thing a city does under the threat of removal of any funding, then this gives absolute, ultimate control to the fed govt and makes any political subdivision meaningless.

That being said, this was the city, not the university. The SC already said that a school can't prevent recruiting on a campus when that campus receives federal funding (so much for my arg in the previous paragraph - but I still believe it). In that case, it had nothing to do with war opposition though - it was based on a school's policy not to permit employers to recruit that discriminated on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, etc... and the military's policy to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

Also, unless I'm misreading - they didn't actually do anything. They just debated whether the recruiters were welcome (initially saying no, changing stances here), not actually kicking them out.

cabaker- "sometimes i feel like the people who are so far left and anti-war go and do things that "support the troops" only so they can say they did when people call their patriotism into question."

I couldn't have said to better myself, I have always suspected that!
and I agree with you too, esk4; god bless!

said it*

They are within their rights to decide what type of businesses can operate within city limits. However, I wish they would not target recruiters, these people work everyday, not sit behind a desk making policy decision on high.

There are sooo many issues they could address effectively, like Vets issues. There is a large homeless Vet community in the area, due to the proximity of bases, if they wanted to make a strong anti-war statement should have addressed how we leave our Vets twisting in the wind after wars.

I mean, coming from a military family (even spent part of my childhood at Fort Ord), we fortunately develop a pretty insular support system early on, but there are some who come back needing extra assistance and yeah some focus on this very real tragedy of war would be nice. Imo, recruiting is voluntary, although, admittedly sometimes not practiced by decent people as Mina pointed out, but the care provided after serving is atrocious.

Wow, there are a lot of seriously rude comments on this post.

I think that you CAN disagree with what the government is asking those troops to do, and support the troops. It is a noble thing to offer to serve your country "no questions asked". That is why I think that as american citizens, we should be asking questions before those men and women head to war, so that they can commit knowing that this country is looking out for them.

Calling the Marines "uninvited and unwelcome intruders." Wow! That's just disgusting. I think people should be able to protest the war and even discourage the recruiters ... but let's not go overboard. Since when is the US government intruding on US land?

I didnt even read this, but I just saw Berkeley vs. the Marines and decided to immediately vote for the Marines.

Come on, its Berkeley.

I could understand the people of the city voting (and not just the City Council) to remove the recruitment office if the office was badgering or bothering the citizens, pushing them to be recruited. But if it's just an office of recruitment, I don't think and people voluntarily go to it, I don't see the problem with it being there.

Remedios- "Also, unless I'm misreading - they didn't actually do anything. They just debated whether the recruiters were welcome (initially saying no, changing stances here), not actually kicking them out."

Just wanted to point out that the city counsel gave the protest group either a parking spot or spots in front of the recruiting center AND gave them a permit to protest during the hours of 12-4 pm in front of the recruiting center.

So they have made it very clear that they are not welcome, although there are MANY in Berkley who feel that what the city counsel and the protesters are doing is wrong.

Just an aside, but one of my neighbors is from Berkeley and she is an effing PSYYYYYYYCHO.

Every little thing pisses her off. Seriously. EVERYTHING.

cine-lover - you're right, I did see that. I just meant they weren't kicking the recruiters out, as some posts here seem to be assuming. Unless there's something else that I missed?

Remedios - The post starts off with this:

In January, the City Council of Berkeley, CA, voted to tell the United States Marines that their downtown recruitment office was to be shut down...

Ha.. I read articles, even the one linked, but apparently skimmed over the first sentence in the post. I read a bunch of articles about it and none of them actually mentioned shutting down, just that they were not wanted. Is that accurate then? Everything I'm reading says they were going to send the Marines a letter that they were not welcome in the city, but nothing about actually taking any action to shut them down/kick them out. One source cited the now rescinded resolution as saying: "If recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

Cabaker - I'm talking about my experiences as a Peace Corps recruiters, where very often we would be set up at a table or booth next to military recruiters at schools, colleges, etc. They do lie, and it's balls-out, no-holds-barred lying... they tell kids that they can leave the military at any time, that they'll get money for college whenever they want, etc. It's gotten to the point where Peace Corps recruiters now pass out Truth Pamphlets for people who want to serve their country and help out without being lied too - that's embarissing for the US Military to have to face.

Also, why does everyone only think of Berkeley as though we're still in the 70s? Hello people, this is 2008, not the middle of the Vietnam War. Get over it.

Juju- I completely agree, and couldn't have said it better!

Cabaker- I also wonder what caused that shift in opinion...my grandfather was a Seebee and is so immensely proud of his work in the Navy, and I'm proud of him!
But there are definitely some negative associations with military men and women now. Is it because there are some lower recruiting standards? Does it have to do with people waiting to get married? I ask that only because of the comment that moms don't necessarily jump for joy at their daughters dating/marrying military men these days. I think the Navy experience at a base in Guam was very different for my grandfather because he was already married than if he was a young man today without any sort of structure in his personal life. Does that make any sense? In any case, it's very bothersome that something so important and laudable is perceived so negatively.

Oh, and I think the city council's behavior in this case was absolutely ridiculous. The Marines had every right to be there.