Dear Editor,

There are two sides to the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) controversy. Those who support the program point out that it is liked by students, that it gives them a place where they feel comfortable. Students form long lasting friendships and many students find a home-away-from-home in the supportive atmosphere that is created in JROTC. Some are taught leadership by practicing it. Others learn how to follow directions.

Many parents like it because they know their teenagers participate in a safe, supervised, drug and alcohol- free after-school program.

Those who oppose JROTC feel the military is bad for teenagers. It is used to attack countries in the interests of oil companies, etc. It discriminates against the homosexual community. Those people don’t want students to join the military and don’t want to give students the option to do so.

The national leader of JROTC says it is a good recruiting tool for the military and lets face it, the military would not fund JROTC if it was not in their interest to do so. Like the Blue Angels, it is a good recruiting tool.

I think there is an important middle ground between the two groups. I propose that we keep JROTC and require that students be taught the realities about the US military. This history includes invading countries that have not attacked us (Nicaragua, Granada, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, and Iraq to name a few.)

Students should be taught the history of mutinies and rebellions in the military when soldiers and sailors refused to blindly follow orders in wars they knew were wrong.

We should have speakers from various organizations come to talk about the realities of job training (90% of the jobs the military has have no use in civilian life). The realities of college (soldiers have $100 a month deducted from their paycheck to be eligible for the promised college tuition. If they don’t satisfy the requirements of the program, they forfeit the money they have invested from their paychecks.)

I think this proposal will satisfy both groups of people.

Lawrence Orloff