Hard to recruit soldiers when there’s no trust
Re: “Army sees safety as top recruiting obstacle,” Feb. 13 news story
As an “old soldier” (Armor/Cavalry Officer Commissioned in 1978) I found the article on Army recruitment difficulties to be entirely credible.
In the last several years, young Americans have witnessed the debacle in Afghanistan and the unnecessary deaths and atrocious abandonment of both American and allied personnel. They witnessed the forced COVID vaccination of service members, regardless of their moral or religious objections, and the general discharging and subsequent loss of well-earned benefits of those who refused the vaccination.
Given only those two very well-known, well-publicized, and blatant acts of abandonment of our service personnel by the political yes-men in the military chain of command, it is no wonder that our young Americans do not trust Army leadership. I wouldn’t trust the posturing, bloviated generals, either.
Personally, I would rather have a small, extremely well-trained, highly-motivated force rather than thousands of CAT-IV or CAT-V enlistees just to “keep the numbers up.”
Richard D. VanOrsdale, Broomfield
Keep politicians out of public health
Re: “The final say in public health emergency responses,” Feb. 15 letter to the editor
Is the letter writer being ironic here? The former president suggested we might be able to inject bleach. Local government officials refused to do lockdowns. Wear masks. Yes, health officials were scrambling for answers. This was a first for them. The anti-vaxers jumped in, including elected officials who believed the same. Do you honestly think that local elected officials can make any better decisions? Would you trust your mayor who couldn’t make a “hard” decision because “he didn’t have the stomach for it?” Would you trust Rep. Lauren Boebert to make your health decisions? Or your local county commissioners? Or your city councils, of which some of you may wonder how they got elected other than with special-interest monies financing their campaigns?
Gary Casimir, Colorado Springs
What about the rights of MSU victims?
Re: “3 people are fatally shot, 5 hurt at Michigan State University,” Feb. 14 news story
The freedoms defined in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution convey benefits to individuals and society with one notable and tragic exception. The result is a nationwide gun culture and a freedom that allows violent, unstable individuals to possess weapons. The Second Amendment brought no benefit to the victims of the mass shooting (the 71st in the nation in 2023 alone) at Michigan State University last Monday night, nor even to the perpetrator of that terrible crime. Had his “right to bear arms” somehow been “infringed,” he might be alive today, and students at the university would be attending classes. Instead, members of congress offer time-worn “thoughts and prayers” while the nation mourns and braces for news of the next horrific shooting.
Frank Tapy, Denver
A sad state, indeed
Re: “Teen girls report record levels of sadness,” Feb. 14 news story
Our young women’s troubles may not all be personal or national. Perhaps they are tuned in on another level of what it means for our species to be living unsustainably, with nuclear war hanging over heads.
Bob McCormick, Denver
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
