40,000 US troops have deserted since 2000

[Rot 911]

Originally posted by einreb
Here's an odd one for you... Is this a common thing in the military?
A buddy of mine (w/a young wife, two young kids) spent several years on the Navy. He then stayed on in the reserves and has (I think) 17 years total. He's about to get shipped off to a training camp that will essentially shift him out of the Navy and into the Army and he has been told to expect to see 'front line action' (whatever that means).

I think your friend is not telling you the whole story. What you are referring to is the "Blue to Green" program where people in the Air Force or Navy can voluntarily transfer to the Army. There are no involuntary transfers.

[1967 R50/2]

Originally posted by pmajka
if its ideals that are worth fighting for, then we need to invade china, North Korea and Cuba. And while we are at it, France.

they have different Ideals than us.

Feel free to fight for dirt if you want. I don't own any, so I have no stake in that.

If you don't think the US is a collection of ideals put forth in the constitution, than you may as well live in NK, Cuba etc....they've got dirt to. There is nothing special about dirt. It's everywhere.

[Seahawk]

Originally posted by einreb
Here's an odd one for you... Is this a common thing in the military?

A buddy of mine (w/a young wife, two young kids) spent several years on the Navy. He then stayed on in the reserves and has (I think) 17 years total. He's about to get shipped off to a training camp that will essentially shift him out of the Navy and into the Army and he has been told to expect to see 'front line action' (whatever that means).

He was however, given the option to quit completely. I.E. he wouldn't have to go to Iraq, but he would lose out on his pension that he would have been eligable for in a few years.

Talk about a rock and a hard place.

Einreb,

It sounds like he has been assigned to what is called an, "Individual Augmentation" (IA).
Many of the officers who work for me are either in prepartions for an IA, on one or just about to return. The lenght of an IA varies from six months to a year.
There is also now a six week (I think, could be longer) school run by the Army that takes Air Force, Coast Guard and Navy IA's and gets them up to speed on the basic skills they will need in the desert.
Your friend will not become an Army guy!

[techweenie]

Originally posted by Kurt V
I think your friend is not telling you the whole story. What you are referring to is the "Blue to Green" program where people in the Air Force or Navy can voluntarily transfer to the Army. There are no involuntary transfers.

I have heard from more than one place that this is now taking place on an involuntary basis.

[on-ramp]

Originally posted by singpilot
Those kind of people are called trolls. You can usually spot them by the ridiculously inflammatory titles of their threads.
.

70% of users here believe that bush is a war criminal. i guess there must be a lot of trolls around here.

[gaijindabe]

What I have read is that the Air Force and Navy have no problem with recruitment and their are significant financial incentives given to transfer to the Army.

[einreb]

Originally posted by Kurt V
I think your friend is not telling you the whole story. What you are referring to is the "Blue to Green" program where people in the Air Force or Navy can voluntarily transfer to the Army. There are no involuntary transfers.

I'm aware 'Blue to Green" and this isnt that program. I should clarify that I don't think he will actually be 'in the Army', but will be along side Army guys during this training and then again wherever they send him over there. Its voluntary in the sense that they are not 'making him' do it. He has simply been given the option of leaving the Navy reserves (losing out on the pension) or going into this 'program'.

I'm not saying that its 'wrong' or 'military slavery', just that the guy has a biatch of a decision to make.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by 1967 R50/2
The soil beneath my feet is dirt. I have never owned property and probably won't at this rate.

Ideals are worth fighting for, not dirt. The US is a collection of said ideals.

No, America is a culture based on ideals and is worth defending, the US (i.e. the US Government) isn't worth a bucket of warm spit.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by techweenie
I have heard from more than one place that this is now taking place on an involuntary basis.

All it takes is a stoke of a pen to get it done. As I've stated, if a soldier can leave any time he wants, it's an all volunteer Army. Since that's not true, it's not "all volunteer". Someone stated that since that slavery status is disclosed before enlistment, it doesn't count as slavery. That is incorrect. If someone decided to sell himself into slavery, say to do yard work, and signed a contract to that effect, it is not binding in any way because it is slavery and is prohibited.

The 13th Amendment to the US Constitution is very clear on what is prohibited vis-a-vis slavery, in America.

[rcecale]

State it all you want. State it a thousand times, if it makes you feel better. It doesn't make it any closer to being correct than the first time you stated it. You're wrong, simple as that.

Here, let's try this scenario. Say you're a cardiovascular surgeon performing a heart transplant. Your patient has his chest splayed wide open and his heart has been removed. At this point, you decide that you never wanted to be a surgeon afterall - you'd rather be a lawn maintenance technician. Can you walk away from your patient and let him die, or are you a "slave"?

Your problem, pat, is that your thought processes are way out of whack. According to you, quitters are heroes, American heroes saving lives in Iraq and Afghanistan are thugs and you believe that you are always right.

You've got some real issues there, buddy. You really should see someone about that.

Randy

[singpilot]

Originally posted by on-ramp
i guess there must be a lot of trolls around here.

Truer words were never spoken anywhere on this site.

[AFJuvat]

The Military is a volunteer force. You volunteer to serve for a specific period of time. A contract is drawn up stating this. The contract also states that in a time of national emergency or time of war, your term of service may be involuntarily extended, but that all pay, and benefits will continue until you are released from your obligation.

You read and sign the contract before you take your oath of enlistment. and you take the obligation of your own free will.

So your choice of the term "slavery" is both dead wrong and for myself and as I'm sure to many of the other combat and non-combat veterans that frequent this board, insulting.

The correct term you are looking for is "indentured servitude."

If you look back in our nation's history, you will find many examples of individuals indenturing themselves for a period of time to pay for their passage to the original 13 colonies. Aside from the military, you can still find examples today - contract employees for example.

AFJ

[dd74]

For anyone who has been to high school and college, a person will see joining the military is no less voluntary than joining any other group. They don't recruit with shackles; they recruit with options - some of which are very good options depending upon the person.

My question is if and when a draft comes up, all notions of the military being "volunteer" goes out the window, right?

Even so, the last time there was a draft was during Vietnam, and all a person needed to get out of the draft, IIRC, was be in school - any school.

[NICKG]

Originally posted by techweenie
I have heard from more than one place that this is now taking place on an involuntary basis.

they just did that to a very good freind of mine...against his will. He is already en route to the sands of Iraq for the n teen millionth time..after spending nearly 1 month home. He is not a happy guy considering he enlisted in the Airforce and is now gonna be in the Army...

[fastpat]

Originally posted by rcecale
State it all you want. State it a thousand times, if it makes you feel better. It doesn't make it any closer to being correct than the first time you stated it. You're wrong, simple as that.

Here, let's try this scenario. Say you're a cardiovascular surgeon performing a heart transplant. Your patient has his chest splayed wide open and his heart has been removed. At this point, you decide that you never wanted to be a surgeon afterall - you'd rather be a lawn maintenance technician. Can you walk away from your patient and let him die, or are you a "slave"?

Yes, you most certainly can do that. And no, you will not be arrested for doing it. Considering that isn't likely, it probably has happened rarely in the past. How many people do you know who walk away from $400,000 (or way more) per year careers in which they've invested at least 14 years of their lives to acquire? Surgeons have fallen ill or even died in OR's, do you think that the patient then dies from that issue as well? We have contingencies to handle such things. Try another analogy, one which you know more about.

Your problem, pat, is that your thought processes are way out of whack.

To you.

According to you, quitters are heroes,

Bank robbers who quit are not harassed when they stop robbing banks, other criminals aren't harassed for quitting their criminality. In the case of those quitting the military, for whatever reason; they are essentially quitting the war crimes being perpetrated by the US government and in the face of militarists like you and others, that takes guts and is heroic.

American heroes saving lives in Iraq and Afghanistan are thugs and you believe that you are always right.

War criminals are thugs, murderous thugs. You've seen the braggarts video of Afghanis being blown apart by snipers with .50 cal rifles, those people are serial killers morally and ethically since they are participating in an war of aggression against another country.

You've got some real issues there, buddy. You really should see someone about that.

Randy

It's ugly when an ex-jarhead decends into silliness.

[rcecale]

Originally posted by fastpat
It's ugly when an ex-jarhead decends into silliness.

Nowhere near as ugly as when an American military officer turns traitor. Yes, I speak of you, bearkiller.

We're through here.

Randy

[fastpat]

Originally posted by rcecale
Nowhere near as ugly as when an American military officer turns traitor. Yes, I speak of you, bearkiller.

We're through here.

Randy

"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."

"Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star", 149
May 7, 1918

Now we're through.

[rcecale]

Originally posted by rcecale
We're through here.

Perhaps I was wrong.

Teddy Roosevelt, eh? COOL!!!

“Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checked by failure...than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.”

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is not effort without error and shortcomings; but who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly. So that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

“No man is worth his salt who is not ready at all times to risk his body - to risk his well-being - to risk his life - in a great cause”

“We live in a great and free country only because our forefathers were willing to wage war rather than accept the peace that spells destruction”

Yes, dear ol' Teddy said them all.

Randy

[NICKG]

so Fast pat was an officer in the US Military? what rank? what years of service?