Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

So Much for a Volunteer Army

WODIN

बुद्धकर&
Platinum
First they do a back door draft through stop-loss and call that "normal" procedure. When was the last time the military issued a stop loss order? how about NEVER! Now we have this lil gem....

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=6&u=/nm/20040629/ts_nm/iraq_usa_reserve_dc


Army Defends Plan for Involuntary Troop Call-Up

Tue Jun 29, 5:19 PM ET Add Top Stories - Reuters to My Yahoo!

By Will Dunham

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army on Tuesday defended its plan to mobilize involuntarily 5,600 retired or discharged soldiers as nothing "new or unusual," but critics said it undermines the concept of an all-volunteer military.


The soldiers will be summoned from the Individual Ready Reserve, a seldom-tapped pool of 111,000 people who remain eligible to be called to active duty for eight years after completing their voluntary Army service commitment.


Army officials said these soldiers will be deployed this year to Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites) to fill shortages in specific jobs such as military police and civil affairs.


"It's a management tool which we've always had available to augment our forces when we need additional personnel in a time of war," said Lt. Col. Pamela Hart, an Army spokeswoman at the Pentagon (news - web sites). "This is nothing that's new or unusual."


The move is the latest sign of the strain on the military as the Pentagon struggles to maintain a larger-than-expected force of 138,000 in Iraq through the end of 2005 amid a fierce insurgency whose tenacity caught officials off guard.


Hart said the last involuntary mobilization from the Individual Ready Reserve came during the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites), and before that in 1968 during the Vietnam War.


The Army has previously said it would prohibit tens of thousands of soldiers designated to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan from leaving the service when their volunteer commitment ends.


This "stop-loss" order means soldiers who otherwise could have retired, starting 90 days before being sent, will be compelled to remain to the end of a yearlong deployment and up to another 90 days after returning to their home base. Some may remain in the Army up to 18 months beyond when they were originally scheduled to leave the service.

'BACKDOOR DRAFT'

Rand Beers, national security adviser to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites), said:

"The fact is that this involuntary call-up is a direct result of the Bush administration's diplomatic failure to get real international help in Iraq." Kerry has called the stop-loss order a "backdoor draft." The latest move shows that this back door has "swung wide open," Beers said.


California Democratic Rep. Ellen (news - web sites) Tauscher, a member of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, said the call-up from the Individual Ready Reserve was "a dangerous step that could bring us closer to breaking our military.


America has relied on an all-volunteer military since ending the draft three decades ago.


Retired Army Col. Andrew Bacevich, a Boston University international relations professor, worried about damage to the concept of a volunteer military and said the latest moves indicate the Army is too small for its current missions.

"These are people who used to be soldiers and no longer are," Bacevich said.

"The informal contract -- the one as understood by soldiers regardless of what they actually signed -- is that I have volunteered for a certain period of time. And once that time is up, then the choice returns to me to decide either to continue my service or to opt out. What the Bush administration is doing is just shredding that informal contract."


Bacevich said current service members may feel like they have been treated unfairly and potential volunteers may have second thoughts.

Heritage Foundation defense analyst Jack Spencer said, "It is certainly a sign of our military being stretched thin."

Relying on the Individual Ready Reserve differs from mobilizing members of the Army Reserve, Spencer said.

"It is different because these are guys who are retired. You would prefer not to have to call them up."

The Army Reserve, the better known pool of reservists, consists of part-time soldiers who regularly train together as units on weekends and in the summer.
 
I said it then, I will say it again:

IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SIGNING, DON'T FUCKING SIGN IT.


Who gets called up next? Disabled vets?
 
There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with this. These FORMER service members knew their IRR status when they left the military. It's hard for me to believe that had no idea this would be a possibility though unlikely. It just turns out that this highly unlikely chance manifested into a reality.
 
big4rt said:
There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with this. These FORMER service members knew their IRR status when they left the military. It's hard for me to believe that had no idea this would be a possibility though unlikely. It just turns out that this highly unlikely chance manifested into a reality.

No worries: just read the fine print, that's all.
 
big4rt said:
There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with this. These FORMER service members knew their IRR status when they left the military. It's hard for me to believe that had no idea this would be a possibility though unlikely. It just turns out that this highly unlikely chance manifested into a reality.

nothing wrong with it except for its not our war and dont give me the 9-11 bullshit because if thats the case let our troops stand on the corner of 5 and 9th street with a shotgun....or why not take troops from other "installations"(thats a good word isnt it...say it with me "installation"") around the world ....oh wait , the rest of the world needs america to police them because were so squared away....
 
On a completely different note, our media in Australia are now ramming the term 'homeland security' down our throats.

What the fuck? Australia doesn't have a homeland security department, nor do we need or want one. Yet the media seems to have fallen in love with the term, one dumb ass current affair show even called our defence minister 'homeland security' minister.
 
PERFECTWORLD said:
nothing wrong with it except for its not our war and dont give me the 9-11 bullshit because if thats the case let our troops stand on the corner of 5 and 9th street with a shotgun....or why not take troops from other "installations"(thats a good word isnt it...say it with me "installation"") around the world ....oh wait , the rest of the world needs america to police them because were so squared away....
We be role models. :artist:
 
ChefWide said:
I said it then, I will say it again:

IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SIGNING, DON'T FUCKING SIGN IT.


Who gets called up next? Disabled vets?

Gay ones.

I think I made a good decision last year to get all the way out. My unit wanted me to at least sign up for IRR, but I knew the minute I did that, DA would draft my ass into the sandbox. So I turned in all my TA-50 and got the hell out.
 
And the whole time we thought Russia/Soviet Union was going to be a problem with WW3..nope not the case...was Nostradamus right ??? middle east will lead to WW3 ??
 
i dont see any problem with it. when you sign up, you sign up for eight years. that might be 2-6 years active duty and 6-2 years inactive duty. im sure some of the soliders they are calling back are on their second or more enlistment though. still, i see no wrong in this. we need an army. our army is small rigth now. i wish every abled US citizen/resident did at least two years in the army. i wish it were a law to do at least two years, like most other countries.
 
wow, someone said TA-50. Have not heard that in a while.

Anyway, this is all in the enlistment/commissioning contracts, it's not a draft or anything like that.

I don't think they'll call disabled vets....well, I hope not.
 
Don't worry Poodin,

You and I are Wayyyy too old to worry about this..
Just sit back and fire up a fatty and watch the ricers race up and down your road..
 
Y_Lifter said:
Don't worry Poodin,

You and I are Wayyyy too old to worry about this..
Just sit back and fire up a fatty and watch the ricers race up and down your road..
I worry for our young men and women who may needlessly feed the coffers of larg military contractors with there blood.
 
Very interestings posts, Freeballindc I think that was a wise choice...not matter what anyone says this shit aint going to end anytime soon, even if Bush is re-elected and Iraq becomes tame in the next 2 years guess what some other member of the Axis of Evil is going to do something stupid or so we will be told and guess what, it's going to happen again. Grant it I dont know how things back in the states have been the last 9 months but unless people are extremely pissed off about things I really believe it's going to happen again. I know that even though I'm not back from this combat deployment that I'm going to be stopped from getting out even against my wishes, and yes I knew exactly what the fine print said, but what stinks is how do they expect 5600 people to do I mean grant it those probably being called up are retired brass and CSM's I doubt you will see many young NCO's, 4 yr officers, or Lower Enlisted being called up just yet.

My only complaint is how stop loss is being justified WHEN: 1st of all the forcasts for Iraq are calling for another 30k troops there, but to make up for the lack of troops they just extended tired soldiers that have been gutting it out everyday for a 1yr+ already; 2 if they are telling 10's of thousands of soldiers they can't get out then if retentions in the shitter that bad Give more bonuses, raise the pay, give Joe a reason to stay in besides "hey go get shot at everyday for a year for next to nothing pay" get more soldiers in the army and put rotations back to 6months. Also if it's justified to keep in that many in how can they only call up 5600 people come on now thats not going to do shit, 15-30k seems more realistic to the tempory increase in the size of the army since they can't recruit enough people to fill that temporary gap
 
If Kerry wins what are the chances he'll just abandon Iraq?
 
Tex, at the time it was a tough decision. I wanted to stay in, but had some personal issues on the outside that I had to deal with. And at the time, there was talk about Korea, and beefing up forces in the Pacific to deal with them. My reserve units theater is the Pacific Rim. Take that and couple it with Iraq, and you have deployment orders practically in your hands.

For instance, we had an E-8 who was retired, but was still drilling to earn his points. Not a month after he "retired", he received activation orders, and was shipped to the Gulf. I can only hope that he is OK, and out of harms way.
 
i thought a backdoor draft was what happens when you squat down and rip a hole in the seat of your pants.
 
"It's a management tool which we've always had available to augment our forces when we need additional personnel in a time of war," said Lt. Col. Pamela Hart, an Army spokeswoman at the Pentagon


Notice she said "in a time of war". Didn't Bush declare war/occupation over? Shouldn't she have said "we need additional personnel in a time of rebuilding and glorifying a dirt and rock country at the cost of our childrens education and health care."?
 
AAP said:
Notice she said "in a time of war". Didn't Bush declare war/occupation over? Shouldn't she have said "we need additional personnel in a time of rebuilding and glorifying a dirt and rock country at the cost of our childrens education and health care."?

It should be permitted only when a war has been declared...that's a time of war. Of course, that has not happened since WW2.

As for the other stuff, you don't really believe that 'save the children' bullshit, do you?
 
MattTheSkywalker said:
It should be permitted only when a war has been declared...that's a time of war. Of course, that has not happened since WW2.

As for the other stuff, you don't really believe that 'save the children' bullshit, do you?

Are you saying that the $250 billion or whatever this fiasco has cost wouldn't be better spent educating children?
 
WODIN said:
First they do a back door draft through stop-loss and call that "normal" procedure. When was the last time the military issued a stop loss order? how about NEVER! Now we have this lil gem....

Your ignorance, haste to criticize Bush and wish for bad news are all evident here. IRR recall is common in wartime, most recently done during the first Gulf war, which only lasted less than a year. This one has been going on for over two years.

Stop loss is nothing new either. All soldiers who volunteer are well-aware of these two policies and that war means likely implementation of both.
 
Longhorn85 said:
Your ignorance, haste to criticize Bush and wish for bad news are all evident here. IRR recall is common in wartime, most recently done during the first Gulf war, which only lasted less than a year. This one has been going on for over two years.

Stop loss is nothing new either. All soldiers who volunteer are well-aware of these two policies and that war means likely implementation of both.

But your buddy dubya declared an end to the conflict from his personal air craft carrier a year and a half ago. How is it you invoke this when there is no declaration of war?
 
bluepeter said:
But your buddy dubya declared an end to the conflict from his personal air craft carrier a year and a half ago. How is it you invoke this when there is no declaration of war?

The mission accomplished sign was for that particular unit who had just returned, as you no doubt well know.

No war was declared in Korea, Vietnam, Just Cause or Desert Storm either. Presidents invoke the war powers act and get approval from congress. That is the precedent.

Next.
 
Longhorn85 said:
The mission accomplished sign was for that particular unit who had just returned, as you no doubt well know.

No war was declared in Korea, Vietnam, Just Cause or Desert Storm either. Presidents invoke the war powers act and get approval from congress. That is the precedent.

Next.

In other words, make it up as you go along and make sure you have the votes in Congress to ram through whatever you want.......... ;)
 
bluepeter said:
Are you saying that the $250 billion or whatever this fiasco has cost wouldn't be better spent educating children?

Only acceptable use of this money in my eyes is immediate return to the taxpayers.

Tax-funded education = a disgusting boondoggle that produces lackluster results year after year.
 
bluepeter said:
In other words, make it up as you go along and make sure you have the votes in Congress to ram through whatever you want.......... ;)

Well that is a good check and balance, I think. Plus congress has to approve funding. What sucks is when you get Senators like Kerry who approve the war but then try to deny the funding. This is like pulling the rug out from under our volunteer military.

Fortunately he was out voted. In November he will be outvoted again.
 
Longhorn85 said:
The mission accomplished sign was for that particular unit who had just returned, as you no doubt well know.

No war was declared in Korea, Vietnam, Just Cause or Desert Storm either. Presidents invoke the war powers act and get approval from congress. That is the precedent.

Next.
No Karl Rove fucked up and had it hung up with the grand notion of saying we won the war and fucked up and then lied about it and said the troops had hung it up when in fact the bush advance team had hung up the banner.

That's just a small lie compared to WMD, and nukes falling on American cities.
 
bluepeter said:
Are you saying that the $250 billion or whatever this fiasco has cost wouldn't be better spent educating children?

to have another generation with your education level? tell me how that is not money wasted
 
WODIN said:
No Karl Rove fucked up and had it hung up with the grand notion of saying we won the war and fucked up and then lied about it and said the troops had hung it up when in fact the bush advance team had hung up the banner.
I don't care who hung the sign. It was for the ship and it's crew. If you listened to Bush's speech instead of just focusing on his harnessed crotch you would have heard him say the hardest days of the war were yet to come.
 
Longhorn85 said:
I don't care who hung the sign. It was for the ship and it's crew. If you listened to Bush's speech instead of just focusing on his harnessed crotch you would have heard him say the hardest days of the war were yet to come.
LMFAO!!!!
 
Dude, stop loss is VERY fucking common.

STFU unless you actually have some experience in the military. Trust me, you're not standing up for any soldier's rights here. 90% of the guys I served with would love to be around you moaning and bitching about the military when you HAVE EVEN SERVED.
 
Nubly said:
to have another generation with your education level? tell me how that is not money wasted

You're taking a dig at my education level? That is beyond hilarious. Aren't you the general EF bitch that everyone agrees is a complete and utter moron? Go back to your trailer park in West Virginia and make out with your cousin Mary Jo.
 
Top Bottom