US Army Continues Back Door Draft

[fastpat]

Since the Army can't get enough fools to join now, it's using slave labor to fill the ranks. Don't worry folks, it's going to continue to get worse, much worse. The federal courts aren't going to step in to stop the little fuhrer in the White House, either.

Unless enough of you have had enough.

US Army forces 50,000 soldiers into extended duty
Sun Jan 29, 2006 2:46 PM GMT10
Printer Friendly | Email Article | RSS


By Will Dunham

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army has forced about 50,000 soldiers to continue serving after their voluntary stints ended under a policy called "stop-loss," but while some dispute its fairness, court challenges have fallen flat.

The policy applies to soldiers in units due to deploy for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. The Army said stop-loss is vital to maintain units that are cohesive and ready to fight. But some experts said it shows how badly the Army is stretched and could further complicate efforts to attract new recruits.

"As the war in Iraq drags on, the Army is accumulating a collection of problems that cumulatively could call into question the viability of an all-volunteer force," said defence analyst Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute think tank.

"When a service has to repeatedly resort to compelling the retention of people who want to leave, you're edging away from the whole notion of volunteerism."

When soldiers enlist, they sign a contract to serve for a certain number of years, and know precisely when their service obligation ends so they can return to civilian life. But stop-loss allows the Army, mindful of having fully manned units, to keep soldiers on the verge of leaving the military.

Under the policy, soldiers who normally would leave when their commitments expire must remain in the Army, starting 90 days before their unit is scheduled to depart, through the end of their deployment and up to another 90 days after returning to their home base.

With yearlong tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, some soldiers can be forced to stay in the Army an extra 18 months.

HARDSHIP FOR SOME SOLDIERS

Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty, an Army spokesman, said that "there is no plan to discontinue stop-loss."

"We understand that this is causing hardship for some individual soldiers, and we take individual situations into consideration," Hilferty said.

Hilferty said there are about 12,500 soldiers in the regular Army, as well as the part-time National Guard and Reserve, currently serving involuntarily under the policy, and that about 50,000 have had their service extended since the program began in 2002. An initial limited use of stop-loss was expanded in subsequent years to affect many more.

"While the policies relative to the stop-loss seem harsh, in terms of suspending scheduled separation dates (for leaving the Army), they are not absolute," Hilferty said. "And we take individual situations into consideration for compelling and compassionate reasons."

Hilferty noted the Army has given "exceptions" to 210 enlisted soldiers "due to personal hardship reasons" since October 2004, allowing them to leave as scheduled.

"The nation is at war and we are stop-lossing units deploying to a combat theatre to ensure they mobilise, train, deploy, fight, redeploy and demobilise as a team," he said. READ THE FULL ARTICLE

[kach22i]

Never sell your mind and body to the government, it's just a bad business decision.

[Rodeo]

"The Thin Green Line," a report commissioned by the Pentagon and written an ex-officer (and immediately discounted by Rumsfeld because of its conclusions), says that America is stretched to the breaking point militarily. If this goes on much longer, there will be irreparable damage.

All to make Iraq safe for the "Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq," the overwhelming winner in the most recent elections.

If you set out to establish the most absurd and tragic military and foreign policy you could dream up, I don't think you would come close to where Bush/Cheney has America at the moment.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Rodeo
If you set out to establish the most absurd and tragic military and foreign policy you could dream up, I don't think you would come close to where Bush/Cheney has America at the moment.

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

[Leland Pate]

This is news?

Stop-loss is nothing new... It sucks. But please don't act like this is something new.

[kach22i]

Originally posted by Leland Pate
This is news?

Stop-loss is nothing new... It sucks. But please don't act like this is something new.

The title of the thread says "continues .

[rcecale]

Please, find a real issue.

Randy

[fastpat]

Originally posted by rcecale


Please, find a real issue.

Randy

The issue is real for those held beyond their legal commitment. As soon as Bush ends his murderous foreign military adventure, I'll stop opposing him, on this issue.

Until then, I'll be pouring it on.

[Rodeo]

So breaking the military in order to secure Iraq for Islamic clerics is not a "real issue," huh? Guys and gals being ordered to fight and possibly die to advance the cause of radical Islam in Iraq is not a "real issue?"

Stay the Course.

[Nathans_Dad]

As Leland said, stop losses are nothing new. Guess fastpat just heard of them. They have been going on for years and years in various specialty fields. 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.

As someone said above, you might want to look for another issue cause this one is old news...

[TheMentat]

Originally posted by Rodeo

Stay the Course.

you gotta stay the course... otherwise you'd be flip-floppers...

[Rodeo]

I'm afraid it is news, and not good news:

Stretched by frequent troop rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has become a “thin green line” that could snap unless relief comes soon, according to a study for the Pentagon.

Andrew Krepinevich, a retired Army officer who wrote the report under a Pentagon contract, concluded that the Army cannot sustain the pace of troop deployments to Iraq long enough to break the back of the insurgency. He also suggested that the Pentagon’s decision, announced in December, to begin reducing the force in Iraq this year was driven in part by a realization that the Army was overextended.

As evidence, Krepinevich points to the Army’s 2005 recruiting slump — missing its recruiting goal for the first time since 1999 — and its decision to offer much bigger enlistment bonuses and other incentives.

“You really begin to wonder just how much stress and strain there is on the Army, how much longer it can continue,” he said in an interview. He added that the Army is still a highly effective fighting force and is implementing a plan that will expand the number of combat brigades available for rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan.

The 136-page report represents a more sobering picture of the Army’s condition than military officials offer in public. While not released publicly, a copy of the report was provided in response to an Associated Press inquiry.

‘Race against time’
?Illustrating his level of concern about strain on the Army, Krepinevich titled one of his report’s chapters, “The Thin Green Line.”

He wrote that the Army is “in a race against time” to adjust to the demands of war “or risk ‘breaking’ the force in the form of a catastrophic decline” in recruitment and re-enlistment.

[Nathans_Dad]

Rodeo I'm just telling you what the truth is from inside the military. Now, you can believe that or continue to read the columns that you cut and paste. It's up to you.

[Rot 911]

Hmmm, let's see I joined the Army in 1973. Let me cover all the stop losses I remember being a part of:

1973: Ford stop loss for the Israel-Arab conflict.
1979: Carter: Stop loss for possible conflict with Iran
1983: Reagan: Stop loss for Grenada Invasion
1989: Reagan: Stop loss for Panama Invasion
1991: Bush the First: Gulf War 1
1993: Clinton: Somalia
2003-: Bush the Second: Gulf War 2

[Moses]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
...stop losses are nothing new.

That doesn't make it right. Particularly when our troops are struggling to free the Iraqui people from a bloodthirsty tyrant so they can install an Islamic Revolutionary Government.

[TheMentat]

Originally posted by Kurt V
Hmmm, let's see I joined the Army in 1973. Let me cover all the stop losses I remember being a part of:

1973: Ford stop loss for the Israel-Arab conflict.
1979: Carter: Stop loss for possible conflict with Iran
1983: Reagan: Stop loss for Grenada Invasion
1989: Reagan: Stop loss for Panama Invasion
1991: Bush the First: Gulf War 1
1993: Clinton: Somalia
2003-: Bush the Second: Gulf War 2

you left the military 7 times?

[Rodeo]

Stop loss has NEVER been used to this extent, and you know it. Never.

And the Army is in danger of breaking, according to a brand new Pentagon study. I'll take the study as the closest thing I can get to real data on the situation. And so should you. Anecdotal evidence is nice, hard data fro a Pentagon study is nicer.

[Rot 911]

Originally posted by TheMentat
you left the military 7 times?

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.

[Rodeo]

So tell us Kurt how many times you were actually stopped from your desire to leave the military ... I think that would be more accurate data.

[Rot 911]

Originally posted by Rodeo
So tell us Kurt how many times you were actually stopped from your desire to leave the military ... I think that would be more accurate data.

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.