http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aa0V_5Eo_8s

Of course if you want to have an army involved in locations throughout the world, then you probably support a large, diverse force, not because it represents the diversity of the nation, but because it represents the diversity of the areas in which it will operate.

That’s an idea derived from a deeper one about making constitutional machinery work. That underlying idea is to have armed forces of a country, not over it. If they are “the people”, the “nation in arms”, the thinking goes, they can’t be used against the people.

It’s sound if you take it deep enough and really think things through, but you can still have military coups even in countries that have mass conscription in an attempt to head that off. The problem is that the NCO structure can keep the conscripts in order, maybe in barracks, while the coup goes ahead. The constitutional shared interests don’t work as a simple aggregate.

There was a very similar justification for having purchased commissions, in an era where there was a ruling class, to make the armed forces share interests with the ruling class (and so with the country). With experience of the French Revolution, where efficiency reforms had previously got rid of a Garde de Corps loyal to the king, even fine soldiers like the Duke of Wellington thought that Britain would be better served by a loyal officer corps than by an efficient one.

I’m curious WHY an army would “accurately reflect the diversity of its people.” An army is a machine with a job, and that machine runs however damn well the folks in charge want to run it, and carefully aligning the racial or religous makup to match US census data is just stupid. The goal is strong defense, not strong multiculturalism. I’m surprised to hear a comment like that from someone who is apparentl third or fourth generation military.

That being said, if the army told them they it wasn’t going to be a problem BEFORE they signed up, then the army needs to stand by that and accomodate them one way or another. Just make sure you don’t tell any MORE incoming folks that kind of lie. The army made its bed in THIS case when it lied up front.

“I don’t think it’s fair for anybody to ask me to choose between my religion and my country,” Capt. Kamaljeet Kalsi said. “Shaving my beard and taking off my turban — these are part of my body. It’s part of my being.”

Tough, sikh-heads.

When I “enlisted” in the Marine Corp one of the first utterances (albeit a trite phrase) I heard from my D.I. as ALL my hair fell to the floor was:

Your soul may belong to God, but your ASS belongs to the Corps!)

my 5 would be
M1911 LTC Para
a classic redone in acceptable style, and it doesn’t destroy my hands
SOCCOM MK23
supposedly it handles better than the average USP
S&W N frame Model 29
do i have to explain?
Walther P99 or S&W SW99
It just feels weird, in a good way, like it wants to make love to my hand while it shoots (no pun intended)
Remington 700BDL
the action on this thing just feels smooth, solid and consistent, whether or not the barrel is cold and empty, or warm and full of lead build-up

On guns, the FEMA has long struck me as a very good choice, though I would prefer it with a higher calibre. So maybe the H & K G3? And the Calico range is appealing, particularly for pistols, but I regret to say I’m not too sure about their reliability in field conditions.