US Army Continues Back Door Draft

[rcecale]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
As Leland said, stop losses are nothing new. Guess fastpat just heard of them.

Looks like ol' Pat has found a new 'cause'. Protecting the "fools" that enlist in our military, eh Pat?

Bottom line when you sign on the dotted line with the military the contract stipulates that the DOD can retain you past your DOS (Date of Separation) IF your job field is in critical shortage.

Exactly! It's in the contract, so whether YOU agree with it or not, whether you think it's right or wrong, it's something that we all agree to when we enlist.

So, again, please, find a real issue.

Randy

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by Kurt V
Once in 1979. Was going to get out and go to college. They actually kept me in for an additional year. And yes I was pissed off.

How do you think you'd feel being sent back to Iraq for a third time -- to set the table a little nicer so the "Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq" can take over?

[kach22i]

Originally posted by Kurt V
Once in 1979. Was going to get out and go to college. They actually kept me in for an additional year. And yes I was pissed off.

Did you ever get to go to college?

Thomas Edison college was doing remote degree programs long before Arizona state, right?

[Joeaksa]

Originally posted by Kurt V
No. But depending on your (MOS) military occupational specialty, if they want to make sure you are around when needed, they will institute a stop loss for either the entire military or the specific MOS's needed. You get the notice whether or not your term of enlistment is up.

Unless you resign your commission the above is correct.

Slopat and Rodeo are out of newsworthy items, so they are dredging up more brown material to sling. So sad that they are using the soldier who are protecting their rear to try to again futher their political ideas. Gosh, that sounds like that Sheehan witch!

JoeA

[Rot 911]

Originally posted by kach22i
Did you ever get to go to college?

Yes I got off of active duty in 1980 and went into the active Army Reserve. Went to undergrad and then law school. Got activated for Operation Just Cause in 1989, then again for Gulf War 1 and it looks like maybe again for Gulf War 2.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by TheMentat
you left the military 7 times?

I worked with a guy that had been to war twice, Panama during his regular enlistment, and Iraq I, not by stop loss, but by being recalled from his discharge. That's right, he was out and in a civilian job and they came for him. Two needless wars, and they guy hadn't seen his 21st birthday yet.

What's that say in the 13th Amendment? "Involuntary Servitude" being prohibited an all, sure looks like slavery to me.

It's been an issue each time it's been used, and it's an issue now. Get used to hearing about it until it stops.

[Nathans_Dad]

Pat, then that means you will be preaching about the horrors of stop losses from here to eternity. As mentioned above, stop losses occur whenever there is a serious military situation going on and the command feels there might be a need for retaining troops.

I appreciate those troops that get upset when they are stop lossed, I guarantee you if I get stop lossed when my DOS comes up I will be mad too. But you know what? It's the job. That is what you signed up for when you signed that contract.

I have never understood the complaints of reservists or active duty who complain that they are sent overseas to fight a war. You signed up for the Army or Army Reserves!! What did you think the goal of the military was? The job of the US military is to kill people and break stuff. Period. If you sign a DOD contract then you sign up to support that mission.

Being in the military is tough sometimes, but that's the job. Perhaps I am being anecdotal, and I appreciate Rodeo's concern, but I really don't need an anti-war protestor defending me when it comes time to fulfill my duty. I signed the contract, I knew full well what I was getting into.

[Moses]

It's an incredibly short sighted policy. The stop loss program dramatically injures recruitment efforts. Far simpler to declare victory in Iraq and leave.

[Moses]

Originally posted by Moses
It's an incredibly short sighted policy. The stop loss program dramatically injures recruitment efforts. Far simpler to declare victory in Iraq and leave.

Sorry. Bad idea. If we leave now, Iraq may find itself under the control of some Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution or something equally sinister. Can't risk that.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
Pat, then that means you will be preaching about the horrors of stop losses from here to eternity. As mentioned above, stop losses occur whenever there is a serious military situation going on and the command feels there might be a need for retaining troops.

No, as a retired reserve officer, I'm opposed to this form of the draft and always have been. This is but one of the requirements for the US governments foreign meddling. Yes, it has been going on for a long time. It's been wrong the whole time.

I appreciate those troops that get upset when they are stop lossed, I guarantee you if I get stop lossed when my DOS comes up I will be mad too. But you know what? It's the job. That is what you signed up for when you signed that contract.

That's crap. If you volunteer, then that's your problem, but if you get held against your will, that's slavery, period.

I have never understood the complaints of reservists or active duty who complain that they are sent overseas to fight a war. You signed up for the Army or Army Reserves!! What did you think the goal of the military was? The job of the US military is to kill people and break stuff. Period. If you sign a DOD contract then you sign up to support that mission.

Many are like me, I was in to defend America, and nothing else. When you get sent to a war like that in Iraq, which isn't to defend America, then that entitles you to take whatever action you can. These soldiers should just quit, staging a huge sitdown strike.

Being in the military is tough sometimes, but that's the job. Perhaps I am being anecdotal, and I appreciate Rodeo's concern, but I really don't need an anti-war protestor defending me when it comes time to fulfill my duty. I signed the contract, I knew full well what I was getting into.

Well, one thing is certain, you've certainly swallowed the propaganda hook, line, and sinker. That's really foolish.

[yellowline]

Of course truth is stranger than fiction, fiction has to make sense. Samuel Clemens

True, however:

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Samuel Clemens

Anybody can get a book published today saying whatever they want to say. In fact, too many talking heads have their own book to hawk.

I'm not discrediting the book, but at the same time, why are you proclaiming it as gospel?

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by yellowline
I'm not discrediting the book, but at the same time, why are you proclaiming it as gospel?

You mean the Pentagon study that says the military is in danger of breaking?

Because it's the most recent, authoritative data on the subject. Do you have something better?

[Leland Pate]

My biggest problem with stop-loss is that many (especially HS graduates) honestly DON'T know what they're getting themselves into. More often than not many of these guys do not remember the recruiter telling them about the dangers of stop-loss. It is buried in the contract somewhere, but it is not exactly forthcoming. Stop-loss SUCKs. There is no arguement there. It can truely screw with people's lives.
But I can't see how this can be applied to smear the administration. It is a DoD thing... not a republican/democrat idea.

This administration has done a piss-poor job on many fronts. And you know what... I think they ALL do. To be honest, I am disappointed. But I hate seeing people so jaded (on both sides) that they lose grasp of reality. Both sides. It's just silly.

[yellowline]

Because it's the most recent, authoritative data on the subject. Do you have something better?

That's what happens when you skim through something.

I just assumed it was someone with an axe to grind. If it's backed by most of the Pentagon, then I guess it's good data.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Leland Pate
My biggest problem with stop-loss is that many (especially HS graduates) honestly DON'T know what they're getting themselves into. More often than not many of these guys do not remember the recruiter telling them about the dangers of stop-loss. It is buried in the contract somewhere, but it is not exactly forthcoming. Stop-loss SUCKs. There is no arguement there. It can truely screw with people's lives.
But I can't see how this can be applied to smear the administration. It is a DoD thing... not a republican/democrat idea.

This administration has done a piss-poor job on many fronts. And you know what... I think they ALL do. To be honest, I am disappointed. But I hate seeing people so jaded (on both sides) that they lose grasp of reality. Both sides. It's just silly.

I agree, both parties resort to slave labor when they want cannon fodder to fight in these military adventures.

We need to stop the practice.

[rcecale]

Originally posted by fastpat
No, as a retired reserve officer, I'm opposed to this form of the draft and always have been.... These soldiers should just quit, staging a huge sitdown strike.

Quit? Sitdown strike? Well, it's obvious you weren't a Marine officer.

Randy

[Seahawk]

Originally posted by rcecale
Quit? Sitdown strike? Well, it's obvious you weren't a Marine officer.

Randy

It is.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by rcecale
Quit? Sitdown strike? Well, it's obvious you weren't a Marine officer.

Randy

It is certain that I'm not a jarhead, never was, never wanted to be one.

But, more to the point, who cares? The government is abrogating the contract they struck with these men and women, making them null and void.

They should resign, and walk away.

Now, if only one or two do it, they'll be arrested and a few are being arrested, but if thousands do it, the practice of involuntary servitude stops.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Seahawk
It is.

You got that right. Of course, I never met a Marine officer or enlisted that didn't respond correctly to a bullet from an M-16, either.

[Seahawk]

Originally posted by fastpat
You got that right.

I'm sure the Corps is at ease.

But I wonder: You replied to this:

Being in the military is tough sometimes, but that's the job. Perhaps I am being anecdotal, and I appreciate Rodeo's concern, but I really don't need an anti-war protestor defending me when it comes time to fulfill my duty. I signed the contract, I knew full well what I was getting into.

With this:

Well, one thing is certain, you've certainly swallowed the propaganda hook, line, and sinker. That's really foolish.

So, what propaganda did you swallow when you took the oath as a reserve officer?