Problem SOLVED! No Child Left Behind

The United States educational system is in a relative shambles.  Each year, we tumble further from the top of the rankings in all of the core disciplines.  Meanwhile, the system that was meant to stem that decline, namely the No Child Left Behind Act, has proven adept only at being a horrible misnomer.  Indeed, as many or more children are being left behind educationally now as have ever been.  High stakes testing has only served to prove that our educational system is in a perilous position; it has not taken any measures toward fixing it.  The children who were once promoted to the next grade for social reasons are now either being held back due to low test scores or promoted through the actions of cheating teachers, who often have monetary incentives to cheat their lower performing students on to the next grade.  The least the students are learning is precisely what they were learning before, with added humiliation.  The most they're learning is how to effectively cheat their way through life.  Neither represents a positive improvement in their overall education, although one could certainly argue that public humiliation may be a meaningful -- if archaic -- motivator for some.

As a result of this grand failure, the lower quality students, who were already alienated from their classmates by their inferior intellects, are becoming further alienated from their age groups and from society as a whole.  Steps must be taken to reintegrate them into productive society before it's too late.  I have consulted with a social scientist friend of mine who has personally guaranteed to me that, if these problem children are not handled with discipline and vigor, they will likely be running the streets of our cities in feral packs by the conclusion of this decade.  The kids are not alright, and it is our responsibility to guide them with a firm hand.

Even removing public safety from our list of concerns, consider the opportunity cost of allowing hundreds of thousands of failed students to roam the countryside jobless and alienated from their smarter peers.  While these children may be idiots by all formal measures, they are surely smart enough to steal the feed from our nations livestock to sustain themselves, and farmers will have to hire full time security staffers to patrol their crops and guard against interlopers.  In turn, this will drive up the price of food across the nation and produce untold strain on our already buckling economy.  Again, we must move in a direction that keeps our less intelligent children busy and our crops secure.

Isn't it possible that there is a better outcome for all concerned?  Isn't it possible that these unfortunate mongrel children can be set to a task that will keep them away from our crops and avoid their possible contamination of our brighter students while at the same time benefiting the greater good in a wholly respectable way that also leaves them prepared to be somewhat productive for whatever balance remains of their cretinous existences?  I submit to you that, yes, there is such a possibility.

I would like you to direct your attention, now,  to our current struggle against international terrorism.  It is perhaps the most broadly defined armed conflict in the history of the world.  As such, and as could well be expected, it is a formidable weight both on our national budget and on our military as currently constructed.  Any measures that could be taken that would reduce the strain on our troops in the field while simultaneously lessening the load on our economy would certainly be accepted not only as rational, but as distinctly necessary.  Any rejection of such a measure should be interpreted as a concession of defeat, and probably as (at least) vaguely treasonous.

Most experts agree that with the proper manpower, the globe could easily be wiped clean of the terrorist scourge once and for all.  Our military, however, does not have unlimited resources.  As we currently maintain a volunteer army, our might and thus our ability to combat external threats is tied directly to both our ability to recruit and to our ability to pay for these recruits, i.e., their salaries, equipment, room and board, etc.  It is well known that adults are much larger than children, and therefore they require more fabric for their uniforms and larger beds, and are also less fuel efficient.  I consulted a friend of mine who is a master of kinematics, and he was very clear in expressing that the cost to transport a full grown man overseas is substantially greater than the cost to transport an immature eight-year old dolt.  Naturally, when they are valiantly killed in battle, they will be buried in smaller, cheaper caskets, and they will be just as inexpensive to ship back as they were to ship out.

The strain the conflict causes is even deeper than that, though.  Our well trained military men overseas could be put to better use stateside, where they could use their military training and hard-won skills to help restore the earning potential of our economy.  In the meantime, these men could be replaced overseas by those who require training, but who would be unable to fulfill the homefront tasks of the fully grown soldiers of normal intelligence.  Many of these soldiers also have families, and these families, with their breadwinners unnecessarily in the Middle East, hurt the fighting morale of our nation as if they sense the solution themselves just beyond the grasp of their fingertips.

If you don't know where I'm going with this by now, you probably never will:  I suggest that, upon failing their standardized tests, we immediately enter our poorly achieving youths into a period of compulsory military service.  There should be no age limit tied to this service; indeed, the smaller the child is, the more apt he or she will be for strategic placement.  We will be able to place soldiers in prime tactical locations where they would never previously fit.  We will be able to downsize our vehicles, which will result in better maneuverability, higher mobility and less overall resource cost.  A tank for full grown humans that once cost between four and five million dollars may cost half of that after it is downsized to meet the diminutive nature of our newest "recruits."  A physiologist friend of mine recently appraised me of the fact that the average child is perfectly capable -- and more than willing -- to carry a standard issue M-16 rifle, and since it is common knowledge that the average idiot is stronger still than his pale, bookish counterpart (and also factoring in the physical benefits of basic training), this basic element of military hardware will not have to undergo a costly renovation to outfit our miniature army.

The benefits would not end there.  Even aside from all the benefits implicit from earlier statements -- we would no longer have to worry about the corruption of good students, we would never have to deal with the potentially very messy problem of feral children packs, our economy would receive a massive boost from an influx of highly trained skilled workers, our national fighting spirit would be restored and so on -- we'd also reap the benefits of the psychological effects that an army of children would have on our enemies.  If we send our worst children to war, our enemies will know that we will give no quarter, and we are willing to match their cunning cost-effectiveness every step of the way.  This will discourage their fight, which is based primarily on such concerns.

Also, consider that children heal much more quickly than adults, and may therefore prove more durable in returning to the battlefield even after several injuries. 

I hope that I have outlined well the benefits of my plan.  I believe that once it is carried to its logical end, and the children for whom No Child Left Behind are transferred to the institution to which the origin of that phrase can be traced, the world will be a safer, smarter, and more cost-efficient place, and the United States of America will once again shine as a beacon of extreme frugality and intolerance of failure at any level.  And, when the military tradition holds, no child will be left behind... on the battlefield.  Readers, it is the only way.  It was a great problem, but it is solved.