Pelican Parts Forums - Army Is Cracking Down on Deserters

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)

- Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)

- - Army Is Cracking Down on Deserters (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/340330-army-cracking-down-deserters.html)

Army Is Cracking Down on Deserters

It's sad what's happening to our country and to our military.

Army Is Cracking Down on Deserters
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/09/us/09awol.html?ei=5090&en=a93bb16660600854&ex=1333771 200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print
By PAUL von ZIELBAUER

Quote:

At an Army base in Alaska last year, for example, “there was one guy who literally chopped off his trigger finger with an axe to prevent his deployment,” Dr. Grieger said in an interview.

.............“We’re enlisting more dropouts, people with more law violations, lower test scores, more moral issues,” said a senior noncommissioned officer involved in Army personnel and recruiting. “We’re really scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to get people to join.” (Army officials agreed to discuss the issue on the condition that they not be quoted by name.)

The officer said the Army National Guard last week authorized 34 states and Guam to enlist the lowest-ranking group of eligible recruits, those who scored between 16 and 30 on the armed services aptitude test. Federal law bars recruits who scored lower than 16 from enlisting.

Desertions, while a chronic problem for the Army, are nowhere near as common as they were at the height of the Vietnam War. From 1968 to 1971, for instance, about 5 percent of enlisted men deserted.

...........Such problems are costly. From October 2000 to February 2002, the Army improperly paid more than $6.6 million to 7,544 soldiers who had deserted or were otherwise absent, according to a July 2006 report by the Government Accountability Office.

This, from the pro-military New York Times.

Quote:

Originally posted by legion
This, from the pro-military New York Times.

Kill the messenger, that will fix it.

EDIT: Different source............................

Many Military Deserters Still Got Paid
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,111877,00.html

Quote:

WASHINGTON -- Congressional investigators have identified dozens of Army reservists and National Guardsmen who remained on the military's payroll and received checks totaling more than $900,000 despite failing to report for duty.

In a report released Monday, the Government Accountability Office said its "limited investigation... likely significantly understates" how much the military has paid deserters among the tens of thousands of reservists and guardsmen called to duty in recent years.

Reserve officials acknowledged they have no practical mechanism to compare payroll records to lists of troops classified as deserters so that checks can be intercepted before they're sent, the GAO said.

The findings expose "a serious fiscal vulnerability and an affront to those who do perform their often dangerous duties as ordered," said U.S. Rep. Tom Davis, R-11th District, chairman of the House Government Reform Committee.

Davis' committee has been scrutinizing the military's payroll systems for several years and had commissioned earlier GAO reports that found numerous instances of troops being underpaid or having their checks delayed for months as they were shifted to new units or new locations inside Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Army has acknowledged those problems, as well as the deserter pay spotlighted in the latest GAO report. The Pentagon's inspector general "generally concurred" with a GAO recommendation that the Army and reserves develop a strategy to ensure that payments are promptly stopped to troops identified as deserters, the new report said.

The GAO said it found a total of 75 reservists who were paid after deserting, focusing most closely on seven assigned to a quartermaster company based in Pennsylvania.

Those reservists, including one Virginia resident, were not named in the report. The GAO said that though they failed to report for duty as ordered in December 2003, six of the seven were paid until the following August, when GAO investigators called the payments to the Army's attention.

One of the soldiers continued to receive payments for eight additional months, collecting another $28,000, the report added. As of May 2006, none of the seven had been arrested for desertion, an offense that carries a prison term of up to 10 years.

Another wonderful missive from the NYT. Wonder if they will give Off Ramp and SloPaste a job? Right up their alley IMHO...

Anyone changing their view on restoring some form of a draft?

I picked up the first link from the Drudge Report 2007, and the second from Military.com.................are they "liberals"?

I find what's happening to be sad for our country, no good can come of this situation.

Marines Still Hunting Vietnam Deserters
USA Today | March 08, 2006
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,90335,00.html

Quote:

WASHINGTON -- In the summer of 1965, Marine Cpl. Jerry Texiero quietly disappeared from his California base, plagued by personal demons and a mounting opposition to the Vietnam War.

Forty years later, in the summer of 2005, Texiero -- now known as Gerome Conti -- was taken into custody by police in Tarpon Springs, Fla., after the Marine Corps tracked him down.

Three decades after the war ended, hundreds of Vietnam-era deserters are still on the loose. Conti's attorneys, Louis Font and Tod Ensign, say the Pentagon, and the Marine Corps in particular, are cracking down on long-term cases in an effort to warn current-day troops in Iraq against deserting.

"My view is that the Marines are trying to send a message to people in the ranks today that they, too, will be required to participate in a war, whether they think it's illegal or immoral," Font says.

Marine spokesman Capt. Jay Delarosa says there was nothing unusual about the treatment of Conti.

However, the Marine official in charge of bringing in deserters said after Conti's arrest that his office was being more aggressive.

Chief Warrant Officer James Averhart, who has commanded the Marine Corps Absentee Collection Center since September 2004, told the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times that he had ordered cold cases reopened and that his squad had caught 27 deserters in his first 11 months on the job, a rate he suggested was higher than those of his predecessors. The Corps last month updated that number to 33 cases.

"I have a different leadership style than the guys who have had this job. My job is to catch deserters. And that's what I do," Averhart told the newspaper.

Delarosa said Averhart would not answer questions from USA TODAY. Asked whether the Marine Corps stands by Averhart's comments, Delarosa said, "I wasn't involved in that particular interview with CWO Averhart." He added that the Marine Corps has "discouraged most requests for interviews because CWO Averhart has been frequently misquoted."

Will Van Sant, who wrote the Times article, says the Marines never contacted him after it appeared.

Conti, 65, says he was surprised. "I thought they couldn't possibly be looking for me anymore. I would think they would have stopped looking for anybody who had been gone as long as I had."

Conti was held for five months -- four in solitary confinement -- then given an other-than-honorable discharge in January. If he had been court-martialed and convicted, he could have faced three years in the brig and a dishonorable discharge.

Another long-term Marine deserter, Ernest "Buck" McQueen, was arrested in Fort Worth in January. McQueen was Ernest Johnson Jr. when he left Camp Lejeune, N.C., in November 1969 because of concerns about going to Vietnam. McQueen, 55, was discharged without disciplinary action.

McQueen says he didn't take a new name to hide. His Social Security card says "McQueen." He says he was born Ernest Johnson Jr., but when his biological father left, his mother raised her son by her married name, McQueen. When he joined the Marines, he says, they insisted he go by Ernest Johnson Jr.

The government drafted men for the armed forces during wartime from the Civil War until 1973. Conti and McQueen enlisted.

In 1974, President Ford offered clemency to Vietnam draft resisters and deserters. Only 27,000 of 350,000 eligible applied. The offer expired on April 1, 1975. In 1977, President Carter pardoned those who dodged the war by not registering or fleeing the country. Neither Conti nor McQueen applied for the Ford pardon. Both spent decades hiding their past from families and employers. McQueen kept his military experience from two wives and two children, and even Conti's best friend in Florida, Elaine Smith, knew nothing of his history with the Marines.

McQueen says he had been in the Marines for nearly two years when he learned of the My Lai massacre in 1968, when hundreds of Vietnamese civilians were killed by U.S. soldiers. "I saw photos of guys with ears on their chains. I lost my desire to be a part of it."

Conti says his decision to desert was a combination of lingering emotional scars from a childhood lived in foster homes and concerns about stories he also was hearing about Vietnam.

Special Agent Tom Lorang of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI) says most older desertion cases are filed away after an initial investigation is completed, although some are re-examined.

Except for the Marine Corps, military officials say long-term cases normally are closed when deserters voluntarily come back in or are stopped by civilian law officials, not through efforts to track them down.

That's not Conti's or McQueen's story. Conti says he was told his file was reopened and his fingerprints were run through a national database. He was in the database because he had been convicted of fraud and theft in 1998. He was on probation and paying restitution when the Marines caught up with him.

McQueen, a carpenter, says his former brother-in-law was called by Marine investigators, and he told them where to find him. "This kind of ... put me in a financial bind," says McQueen, who had been doing carpentry for a church when he was seized.

Conti has returned to his job selling boats, which his employer kept open for him while he was locked up.

"They just need to declare amnesty for everybody from a certain time back or from certain conflicts," says Elaine Smith, Conti's friend. "These guys ... just had issues, as we all did back in the '60s."

Military officials maintain that those who deserted the service are liable under law, no matter how unpopular a war was. "We actively investigate all cases of desertion," says Fred Hall, a spokesman for the Naval Personnel Command. "For each of the active deserters we have on our rolls -- 1,190 as of 31 Jan. '06 -- there is a federal warrant out for their arrest."

Quote:

Originally posted by Moneyguy1
Anyone changing their view on restoring some form of a draft?

Feel that there should be no draft but that the country have mandatory military service for EVERYONE! At least 2 years for every young person in the country. No exceptions, period.

You want the good training, then you enlist for 4 years or longer otherwise at least you are exposed to some disipline and order in their lives then go to college or work.

Quote:

Originally posted by kach22i
I picked up the first link from the Drudge Report 2007, and the second from Military.com.................are they "liberals"?

I find what's happening to be sad for our country, no good can come of this situation.

Sad??? They broke the law, no different than any other crime. In the end they will not go to jail for very long but they deserve to be caught.

Joe:

In agreement. Everyone should donate two years to the betterment of the country in some way or another. Too much reliance on "the other guy" to take care of social/military needs.

Might resolve part of the "me first" narcisstic attitude of so many young citizens.

I think someone that enlists in the military and is surprised they have to go to war is an idiot. That is like applying for a job on the slaughter house floor and being surprised you have to kill moo-moo cows.

Quote:

Originally posted by Joeaksa
Sad??? They broke the law, no different than any other crime. In the end they will not go to jail for very long but they deserve to be caught.

Really?

What do you make of this?

Not Available For Signature

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1176142474.jpg

Not Available For Signature

If I could read it might be able to tell you.

What are you trying to get at? What does a DOD report showing that they did not complete their term of duty have to do with this?

Quote:

Originally posted by Joeaksa
If I could read it might be able to tell you.

What are you trying to get at? What does a DOD report showing that they did not complete their term of duty have to do with this?

The name on it is George W. Bush.:D

Quote:

Originally posted by kach22i
The name on it is George W. Bush.:D

And??? He is short 5 months and change. Was working (if memory serves me right) at a Senators or Congressmans office the rest of the time.

Better than deserting, they knew where he was it was not in Canada.

Joe

Seems to me that anyone not completing the terms of a contract is guilty of breach of contract. It would be interesting to see how other individuals coming up short were treated. One isolated incident tells us nothing about a trend.

IIRC, that happened towards the end of the Vietnam War and the military was discharging people before their terms were up left and right to get their numbers down quickly. A little different than desserting.

Quote:

Originally posted by Moneyguy1
Seems to me that anyone not completing the terms of a contract is guilty of breach of contract. It would be interesting to see how other individuals coming up short were treated. One isolated incident tells us nothing about a trend.

I know someone let out 18 months early on a medical condition which will never get better. They left a loop-hole that they could call him back anytime. I mean he could be 80 years old and they could still call him back to serve those last 18 months.........at least that the story when sitting on a bar stool.;)

We had deserters and folks who made up all kinds of reasons why they shouldn't go to Saudi Arabia in the lead up to Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991. We had people claiming that they were suddenly Muslims and couldn't fight their "brothers", others claimed to be homosexuals, some women got pregnant, etc... all to avoid service during a war. Nothing new about this...

Quote:

Originally posted by legion
IIRC

Inactive Item Review Code?

What does that really mean?

I guess it's who you know:
http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm

This is interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_military_service_controversy
Memos allegedly from Jerry Killian

My best friend's little brother joined the Marines about 2 years ago for a 4-year stint.

He is a stereotypical book nerd. Ultra-smart with no common sense. And completely unlike his big brother (my best friend), he is a hardcore liberal.

He tested into the language program. He was assigned to learn Arabic, but fought for (and was granted) Chinese. He was to spend two years in San Diego learning Chinese, then two years doing intelligence-related translation.

About a year into it, it dawned on him that the military kills people and he might (very unlikely) have to do combat. He starts complain about an old shoulder injury, he gets an honorable discharge.

First thing he wants to do is to go to China to teach English. We convince him that this is a bad idea. (Former marine learning Chinese is discharged and goes to China--his brother and I felt he would be watched and with his total lack of common sense, probably arrested.)

His next idea is to hike the Appalachian trail. He buys himself flip flops, leather pants, and a plane ticket out east. He had no plans for provisions or shelts. Two days later he calls his parents collect asking them to wire him money for the plane ride home.

My point: it's very, very easy to get discharged if one is so inclined.

Since POTUS is 5 months short maybe we could send him to Iraq when his term's up, you know, to help out.

let's see....

Vietnam War (official dates) Feb 28, 1961 to May 07, 1975

Some dates of interest:

1/30/68: Tet Offensive

3/16/68 My Lai Massacare

3/31/68 temporary bombing halt over the notrh

3/70 increased US involvement in Laos and Cambodia

4/70 Draft law changet; ending all occupational and most paternity deferments

4/30/70 Nixon sends troops into Cambodia

July '71 Nixon: "Setting a firm date for withdrawl would serve the enemy's purpose, not our own". (editorial remark: Sound familiar?)

11/12/71 45,000 troops to be withdrawn

The list is long; the above only a few events, and shows that 1968 was no where near the end of the conflict.

Quote:

Originally posted by DaveE
Since POTUS is 5 months short maybe we could send him to Iraq when his term's up, you know, to help out.

Sounds good to me, but is it legal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_military_service_controversy

Quote:

On October 1, 1973, Bush was honorably discharged from the Texas Air National Guard and transferred to the inactive reserves in Denver, Colorado. He was discharged from the Air Force Reserve on November 21, 1974.

Quote:

Originally posted by kach22i
Sounds good to me, but is it legal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_military_service_controversy

I don't know. I just remember the '60 Minutes' story a while back where they were scooping up all the folks in their mid-50s who'd thought their service was up long ago.

Quote:

Originally posted by DaveE
Since POTUS is 5 months short maybe we could send him to Iraq when his term's up, you know, to help out.

Sure that you will be right next to him, right?

Legion,

He would be treated badly, not a good idea. Even if he was not one, he would have "spook" written all over him and it would be difficult.

The boy needs to open his eyes. Too bad that the Marines did not hold him until he grew up.

Quote:

Originally posted by Joeaksa
Legion,

He would be treated badly, not a good idea. Even if he was not one, he would have "spook" written all over him and it would be difficult.

The boy needs to open his eyes. Too bad that the Marines did not hold him until he grew up.

My thoughts exactly. We felt there was a high probability of him never coming back from China.

He's a smart guy. He did high school in three years (was a year younger but graduated with his brother and I), then did college in three years (Bachelor's in Electrical Engineering from U of I). Upon graduation, he did concrete work for a few years in Colorado.

Beyond academia, he's never had a purpose in life. He just moves from one crackpot idea to the next, always getting dissatisfied when he realizes his idea won't be as easy as he first thought. I felt four years a grunt would have taught him more than he is ever likely to get on his own.

Quote:

Originally posted by Joeaksa
Sure that you will be right next to him, right? .........

Joe, I don't think they'll take me with my kidneys. I would dearly consider it though, if I was sure he couldn't weasel out again.:(

Quote:

Originally posted by DaveE
Since POTUS is 5 months short maybe we could send him to Iraq when his term's up, you know, to help out.

You want everyone out of Iraq, you want to send people to Iraq…Make up your freakin’ mind! ;)

Shawn:

They are just being selective about who they send and who they bring back!!

Quote:

Originally posted by thrown_hammer
You want everyone out of Iraq, you want to send people to Iraq…Make up your freakin’ mind! ;)

I know, I know. It's a very confusing situation..........

Quote:

Originally posted by DaveE
I don't know. I just remember the '60 Minutes' story a while back where they were scooping up all the folks in their mid-50s who'd thought their service was up long ago.

The story is still on-line.

Old Soldiers Back On Duty
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/03/60minutes/main658994.shtml

Quote:

Is she reluctant to return to the Army because she is afraid of danger? "No, my reluctance is because what's right," says Mary. "I thought my time was up. And they're telling me that it's not."

Like many Army officers, Mary signed up for eight years -- four years active duty, and four years in the Ready Reserves. She received her discharge certificate in 1998, but she was called up this past June to serve as a transportation officer.

"I called the Delay and Exemption Board. And the young lady that I talked to said that date [on my contract] meant nothing. That my new date is 2018," says Mary.

"I was in shock. I was like, 'What do you mean? I have a piece of paper that tells me that that's my obligation.' And for them to just send me orders and disrupt my life and pull me back, it's disheartening and I feel betrayed, I guess you could say. … The military is betraying me, because I served my time."

Quote:

Originally posted by DaveE
Joe, I don't think they'll take me with my kidneys. I would dearly consider it though, if I was sure he couldn't weasel out again.:(

Am sure that if they stoop low enough to take you that he will come along. Start doing your push-ups GI!

When they are desperate enough to find my worn out body useful, you're all in trouble!

My two cents:

My son joined the Navy. After his "A" School, he was assigned to an aircraft carrier, and discovered the ship was deploying to a war zone (Persian Gulf). He magically appeared back home, stating he had been placed on medical hold pending resolution of a bad back. As a retired sailor, I was naturally skeptical, especially as he went out and found a job (such as it was) and kept moving around. I contacted the legal department on the ship, and was informed that he was listed as a deserter. I asked if they would like him back, and gave them his up-to-date address. He was picked up that afternoon and remanded to Navy custody. After being released into TPU, he was assigned to another carrier, only to desert again. This time I didn't listen to a word he said, but called the police and turned him in (again). They waited until he was just past his 30 day limit, then arrested him yet again. The Navy had had enough of him, and only restricted him long enough to process his paperwork; in the interim, he went UA (AWOL) yet again! His discharge was characterized as OTH (Other Than Honorable); I guess they were giving him more credit than I would have. He never did sign his DD-214; He always tells people who ask that he is in the process of getting his discharge "upgraded" (ain't gonna happen). I was extremely upset with his decision to desert; more for the fact that his shipmates were going to lose sleep and needed rest in a combat zone than in any sympathy for his perceived "plight." In my eyes, his problem stemmed more from a lack of intestinal fortitude than any real slight the Navy may have bestowed upon his sensibilities. I really think 10 years in the pokey would have done him some good - it would show him that yes, Virginia, there ARE consequences for refusing to live up to your commitments!

Sad to see something like this happen and of all the places to be over there, a carrier is probably the safest of all of them. Staying in the Navy would have made a man out of him, and running away from his responsibilities is the last thing any young person needs.

I was in Dubai right before Christmas. Ran into some of the guys off of the Eisenhower before they headed back into the gulf. Nice guys and helped them enjoy some of the sights before they shipped out again.

Joe

Quote:

Originally posted by The Chief
My two cents:

My son joined the Navy. After his "A" School, he was assigned to an aircraft carrier, and discovered the ship was deploying to a war zone (Persian Gulf). He magically appeared back home, stating he had been placed on medical hold pending resolution of a bad back. As a retired sailor, I was naturally skeptical, especially as he went out and found a job (such as it was) and kept moving around. I contacted the legal department on the ship, and was informed that he was listed as a deserter. I asked if they would like him back, and gave them his up-to-date address. He was picked up that afternoon and remanded to Navy custody. After being released into TPU, he was assigned to another carrier, only to desert again. This time I didn't listen to a word he said, but called the police and turned him in (again). They waited until he was just past his 30 day limit, then arrested him yet again. The Navy had had enough of him, and only restricted him long enough to process his paperwork; in the interim, he went UA (AWOL) yet again! His discharge was characterized as OTH (Other Than Honorable); I guess they were giving him more credit than I would have. He never did sign his DD-214; He always tells people who ask that he is in the process of getting his discharge "upgraded" (ain't gonna happen). I was extremely upset with his decision to desert; more for the fact that his shipmates were going to lose sleep and needed rest in a combat zone than in any sympathy for his perceived "plight." In my eyes, his problem stemmed more from a lack of intestinal fortitude than any real slight the Navy may have bestowed upon his sensibilities. I really think 10 years in the pokey would have done him some good - it would show him that yes, Virginia, there ARE consequences for refusing to live up to your commitments!

Sorry about your situation, thank you for sharing.

About ten guys from my old neighborhood joined the military. Some of them high school drop outs, most were not cream of the crop. Six of them "pieces of work" going in never even made it though boot camp. Two got out early on medical, one of which I think was faking a bad back after falling off a tank. Another got kicked out for doing his old high school job of selling drugs. One guy served his full commitment. This was in the late 1970's, no wars going on at the time.

I know a few losers who got less than honorable discharges and they ALWAYS have a story to tell about how they were mistreated, the military lied, it was a conspiracy,etc... and almost all of these guys claim they were in the "US Navy Nuclear Program".

Their parents always make up lies about the kid and support him It must be difficult to be the parent of a person who goes UA (AWOL).

All of the above positive arguments for mandatory service to help these poor souls to mature, whether it be military or civilian. Too many Little Lord and Lady Fauntleroys around for my liking.

Sorry for your situation

Quote:

Chief,
Sorry for your situation, that can't be easy for a parent.