UnderGround Forums
 

PoliticalGround >> Pentagon abandons active-duty time


1/12/07 8:22 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
CPracer16
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 06/06/2006
Posts: 2058
 
WASHINGTON - The Pentagon has abandoned its limit on the time a citizen-soldier can be required to serve on active duty, officials said Thursday, a major change that reflects an Army stretched thin by longer-than-expected combat in Iraq The day after President Bush announced his plan for a deeper U.S. military commitment in Iraq, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters the change in reserve policy would have been made anyway because active-duty troops already were getting too little time between their combat tours. The Pentagon also announced it is proposing to Congress that the size of the Army be increased by 65,000, to 547,000 and that the Marine Corps, the smallest of the services, grow by 27,000, to 202,000, over the next five years. No cost estimate was provided, but officials said it would be at least several billion dollars. Until now, the Pentagon's policy on the Guard or Reserve was that members' cumulative time on active duty for the Iraq or Afghan wars could not exceed 24 months. That cumulative limit is now lifted; the remaining limit is on the length of any single mobilization, which may not exceed 24 consecutive months, Pace said. In other words, a citizen-soldier could be mobilized for a 24-month stretch in Iraq or Afghanistan, then demobilized and allowed to return to civilian life, only to be mobilized a second time for as much as an additional 24 months. In practice, Pace said, the Pentagon intends to limit all future mobilizations to 12 months. Members of the Guard combat brigades that have served in Iraq in recent years spent 18 months on active duty -- about six months in pre-deployment training in the United States, followed by about 12 months in Iraq. Under the old policy, they could not be sent back to Iraq because their cumulative time on active duty would exceed 24 months. Now that cumulative limit has been lifted, giving the Pentagon more flexibility. The new approach, Pace said, is to squeeze the training, deployment and demobilization into a maximum of 12 months. He called that a "significant planning factor" for Guard and Reserve members and their families.
1/12/07 8:22 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
CPracer16
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 06/06/2006
Posts: 2059
So the plan for the global war is still taking shape
1/12/07 9:14 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
AGS
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 10/17/2002
Posts: 2638
What a fucking nightmare.
1/12/07 10:12 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
CPracer16
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 06/06/2006
Posts: 2063
these soldiers are being tortured, not in WWII nor vietnam did they have to do tours like this. This is a back door draft
1/12/07 10:37 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
pfsjkd
69 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 10347

This is a back door draft

LOL!!  Nice try.  You can't draft people that already enlisted.

They signed up for it.  I signed up for it.  Doesn't mean I necessarily like it, but that's what I signed up for.

1/12/07 11:41 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
AGS
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 10/17/2002
Posts: 2640
pfsjkd, if I am reading it correct, it is NOT what they signed up for, but a changing of current policy.
1/12/07 12:05 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MikeD
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 12/06/2006
Posts: 68
Is the Air Force still getting rid of people? They were just starting when I got out in 2005. If I ever called called back up I think I would go to Canada or jail.
1/12/07 12:22 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MachetePhil
3 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 12/01/2005
Posts: 2196
you would be a deserter to avoid the AIR FORCE?!
1/12/07 12:42 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MikeD
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 12/06/2006
Posts: 70
"you would be a deserter to avoid the AIR FORCE?! " I tell myself I would, but realistically probably not. I just don't want any part of what's going on in Iraq.
1/12/07 12:45 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Up With Evil
9 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 9259
What, you allergic to flowers and candy?
1/12/07 2:34 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
pfsjkd
69 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 10350

pfsjkd, if I am reading it correct, it is NOT what they signed up for, but a changing of current policy.

No.  You sign up with the understanding that if there's a war then all bets are off.  They own your ass, plain and simple.  But they only own you if you sign up.

What this will do is discourage people from joining the reserves.

1/12/07 2:40 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
CPracer16
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 06/06/2006
Posts: 2067
pfsjkd, they are recalling soldiers that are no longer active. They have been since the start of the war. They are also pulling reserves back that are not supposed to be going. My neighbor was just sent to Afghanastan, he said that when he would go for his monthly duty the superiors were using the other soldiers to put huge pressure on them to make sure they would agree to go.
1/12/07 2:48 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
dr boudreaux
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 8611
This is a great thing for the troops. For too long they have been kept from doing exactly what they wanted: finishing the job.
1/12/07 3:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
pfsjkd
69 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07 03:10 PM
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 10351

I disagree, the government will offer more money and other incentives to maintain recruitment levels.

LOL!!  Yea, right.  Boy, I expect to be rolling in the extra incentives any day now!!

pfsjkd, they are recalling soldiers that are no longer active. They have been since the start of the war.

That's part of the program.  You do a certain amount of time in the active reserves, and after that you must be in what's called the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), which doesn't require any kind of monthly or yearly participation.  But while in the IRR they can pull you back in if there's a compelling reason to do so (like war breaks out).  Hell, officers take an oath to serve 'at the pleasure of the President', which means that they can be called back ANYTIME.  Even years after resigning or retirement.

They are also pulling reserves back that are not supposed to be going.

Again, you're talking policy changes.  Policy changes are a part of the total package and while I admit that it's a significant development, there's nothing 'illegal' or dirty about it.  The Pentagon has that lattitude and if you joined up thinking differently, well, then you made a mistake.

the superiors were using the other soldiers to put huge pressure on them to make sure they would agree to go.

Admittedly, they are trying to get guys to agree to be voluntarily mobilized as opposed to involuntarily mobilized.  However, they cannot force you to volunteer.  Your friend is absolutely within his rights to refuse to go voluntarily.  If they REALLY need him, then he will be issued involuntary mobilization orders, which he cannot refuse.

1/12/07 3:10 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ATL Cereal
7 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 03/13/2006
Posts: 567
next step not draft, imo, but mandatory military service upon graduation from HS
1/12/07 3:12 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
pfsjkd
69 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 12-Jan-07
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 10352

next step not draft, imo, but mandatory military service upon graduation from HS

That would be just as bad, if not worse, than a draft.  Nobody wants that shit.  There are enough shitbags in the military who volunteered but have no business being there without having to put up with a bunch of people who absolutely DON'T wanna be there.


Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.