[Anti] military operations

[rasoforos]

ok I dont want to put this as a confrontation but...:

a) It was been officially anounced that the US forces will stay in Iraq for at least 3 more years.

b) More and more people had been sent to Iraq after the occupation

c) People in the US who think the war is a mistake ARE now an increasing minority...


Ok , it doesnt have hippies n flowers but this IS turning into Vietnam. A big expensive failure and a quesling government that will collapse the moment the US troops leave...

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Can we sell the left wing of America for medical experiments? Please?

[Azi Tohak]

Naughty Kaiser! Naughty! Not a bad idea though...what would we use them for? Ooo...stem cell research right?

Azi

[sharrukin]

All may not be as it seems!

The army reduced its objective figures (8,050 to 6,700) to actually achieve the recorded percentages in the DoD release.
In addition the figures do not include the 40,000 Stop Loss Orders issued by the military.
Stop Move Orders prevent soldiers from leaving their current unit of assignment.

There is also an increased Reliance on Selective Reenlistment Bonuses (SRBs) which is cash used to bribe the qualified personnel for reenlistment in occupational specialties that are desperately short or cost a lot to train the men doing them.

Stop Loss Orders prevents active duty members from separating from their unit after their term of service is up, and AFAIK isn't part of the retention rates. In the last two years more than 40,000 soldiers, including 16,000 National Guard and reserves, have been blocked from retiring or leaving. The Pentagon has issued Stop Loss Orders from the beginning of 2004, well over a year, preventing servicemen in units destined for Iraq or Afghanistan from retiring.

In addition 3,600 troops from South Korea are already slated to be redeployed this summer to Iraq. More will be rotated from Europe.

The reserve components have had extended, continuous, and multiple activations that are eroding the reserve components morale. The Army as presently structured can hardly conduct normal operations, let alone go to war, without its reserves. Budgetary constraints would suggest this isn't likely to change.

The Oregonian;

Internal Guard documents tell the story: All 10 of its special forces units, all 147 military police units, 97 of 101 infantry units and 73 of 75 armor units cannot, because of past or current mobilizations, deploy again to a war zone without reinforcements. The Guard needs a staggering $20 billion worth of equipment to sustain its operations, a bill Washington may balk at paying.

The Guard is losing soldiers and cannot attract enough recruits to replace them. And the normally dependable flow of soldiers moving from active duty into the National Guard has slowed dramatically.

"One can conclude," said Brig. Gen. Bill Libby, commander of the Maine National Guard, "that we're going to run out of soldiers."

[Redleg]

All may not be as it seems!

The army reduced its objective figures (8,050 to 6,700) to actually achieve the recorded percentages in the DoD release.
In addition the figures do not include the 40,000 Stop Loss Orders issued by the military.
Stop Move Orders prevent soldiers from leaving their current unit of assignment.

There is also an increased Reliance on Selective Reenlistment Bonuses (SRBs) which is cash used to bribe the qualified personnel for reenlistment in occupational specialties that are desperately short or cost a lot to train the men doing them.

Stop Loss Orders prevents active duty members from separating from their unit after their term of service is up, and AFAIK isn't part of the retention rates. In the last two years more than 40,000 soldiers, including 16,000 National Guard and reserves, have been blocked from retiring or leaving. The Pentagon has issued Stop Loss Orders from the beginning of 2004, well over a year, preventing servicemen in units destined for Iraq or Afghanistan from retiring.

In addition 3,600 troops from South Korea are already slated to be redeployed this summer to Iraq. More will be rotated from Europe.

The reserve components have had extended, continuous, and multiple activations that are eroding the reserve components morale. The Army as presently structured can hardly conduct normal operations, let alone go to war, without its reserves. Budgetary constraints would suggest this isn't likely to change.

The Oregonian;

Internal Guard documents tell the story: All 10 of its special forces units, all 147 military police units, 97 of 101 infantry units and 73 of 75 armor units cannot, because of past or current mobilizations, deploy again to a war zone without reinforcements. The Guard needs a staggering $20 billion worth of equipment to sustain its operations, a bill Washington may balk at paying.

The Guard is losing soldiers and cannot attract enough recruits to replace them. And the normally dependable flow of soldiers moving from active duty into the National Guard has slowed dramatically.

"One can conclude," said Brig. Gen. Bill Libby, commander of the Maine National Guard, "that we're going to run out of soldiers."

You realize of course that Stop-Loss has been around in the United States Military for some time. It was used during Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm also. Re-enlistment bonus have also been around for some time also - with many MOS having large re-enlistment bonuses. I remember just after the first drawdown - some enlisted MOS had large re-enlistment bonus even then.

So one must be careful in reading what the media states - especially when the whole story is not being told.

[sharrukin]

You realize of course that Stop-Loss has been around in the United States Military for some time. It was used during Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm also. Re-enlistment bonus have also been around for some time also - with many MOS having large re-enlistment bonuses. I remember just after the first drawdown - some enlisted MOS had large re-enlistment bonus even then.

So one must be careful in reading what the media states - especially when the whole story is not being told.

That doesn't really address the point that the objectives were only met by an increased use of Stop Loss Orders, increasing financial incentives, and reduced recruitment quota's. Whether or not the means to force soldiers to remain on active duty was established in 1902 or introduced last year is beside the point.

The point is that recruitment and retainment is down, and the military is being forced by circumstance to use extraordinary means to maintain force levels. The media in this case was the DoD release that was referred to.

What he is referring to I believe is this DoD release; This uses the reduced manpower objectives and as can be seen for much of the reserve components, even these are not being met.

The Army missed its May recruiting goal of 6,700 by 1,661 recruits (75 percent). This was 8,050 until reduced, and they failed to met even this!


No. 577-05
IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 10, 2005
Active duty recruiting. The Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force met or exceeded their recruiting goals in May. The Navy’s recruiting goal was 1,939, and it enlisted 1,947 (100 percent). The Marine Corps’ goal was 1,843, and it recruited 1,904 (103 percent). The Air Force goal was 1,037, and it recruited 1,049 (101 percent). The Army missed its May recruiting goal of 6,700 by 1,661 recruits (75 percent).

The Air Force Reserve... 682 recruits against a goal of 606.

The Army Reserve enlisted 2,269 (82 percent), the Navy Reserve brought aboard 1,074 (94 percent) and the Marine Corps Reserve had 914 (88 percent). The Army National Guard recruited 4,071 of its 5,791 goal (71 percent). Although the Air National Guard also fell short of its recruiting mission of 860 by enlisting 675 (78 percent),...

[Redleg]

That doesn't really address the point that the objectives were only met by an increased use of Stop Loss Orders, increasing financial incentives, and reduced recruitment quota's. Whether or not the means to force soldiers to remain on active duty was established in 1902 or introduced last year is beside the point.

Actually it address the point more then you realize. The military has done such things in the past when they need to so. Today is no different then Yesterday in that regards. And what objectives are meet with Stop-Loss, Stop-Loss has no bearing on enlistment and re-enlistment quoto's.

The point is that recruitment and retainment is down, and the military is being forced by circumstance to use extraordinary means to maintain force levels. The media in this case was the DoD release that was referred to.

And that would be a valid point in order to meet force levels the Military has maintained the Stop-Loss. The increasing of re-enlistment bonus have been used in the past to maintain force levels - and strong enlistment bonus have been used in the past also. Only the stop-loss program is an extraordinary means - and like already stated before has been used in the past while the military was conducting missions.

What he is referring to I believe is this DoD release; This uses the reduced manpower objectives and as can be seen for much of the reserve components, even these are not being met.

And I was refering to your statements - not anyone elses

The Army missed its May recruiting goal of 6,700 by 1,661 recruits (75 percent). This was 8,050 until reduced, and they failed to met even this!

(sarcasm on) Oh my so the army did not meet the recruiting goals - lets panic and think that we must bribe young men and woment to join the military. (sarcasm off) Care to guess how well my unit was manned during the time from of 1996-1998. It wasn't even close to 80% of the required manning and this was peacetime.

No. 577-05
IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 10, 2005
Active duty recruiting. The Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force met or exceeded their recruiting goals in May. The Navy’s recruiting goal was 1,939, and it enlisted 1,947 (100 percent). The Marine Corps’ goal was 1,843, and it recruited 1,904 (103 percent). The Air Force goal was 1,037, and it recruited 1,049 (101 percent). The Army missed its May recruiting goal of 6,700 by 1,661 recruits (75 percent).

The Air Force Reserve... 682 recruits against a goal of 606.

The Army Reserve enlisted 2,269 (82 percent), the Navy Reserve brought aboard 1,074 (94 percent) and the Marine Corps Reserve had 914 (88 percent). The Army National Guard recruited 4,071 of its 5,791 goal (71 percent). Although the Air National Guard also fell short of its recruiting mission of 860 by enlisting 675 (78 percent),...

Like I stated earler - not the gloom and doom that is being protrayed by some. Is it favorable for the Army - nope - but its not a gloom and doom picture given that the other branches have meet or exceeded their recruitment numbers.