This may be one of the few times the NYT's is right about anything.
Sorry, this isn't one of them.
NYT is never right.
bttt
Now, consider enlistment stats. If you slice & dice by the same factors, which group(s) are stable (or growing) and which ones are declining? And if you match that up to pre/post war 'personal' objectives (such as wanting to fight vs get educational funding), you'd see even greater disparity.
The bottom line is that the overall stats are being weighed down by one group where the decline has been precipitous. But on the other hand, it's the very group that contributes the least, so who really cares?