50% of troops won't re-up

John Reynolds

Ecce homo
Veteran
http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/02/index.html#002482

According to a recent survey of U.S. troops in Iraq by the military's own Stars and Stripes newspaper, the Bush administration's approach to Iraq risks doing to the AVF [All-Volunteer Force] what Vietnam did to the conscript service. After polling almost 2,000 troops, Stars and Stripes found that one-third of them thought the war against Saddam Hussein had been of little or no value and that their mission lacked clear definition. A full 40 percent said that their missions had little or nothing to do with what they had trained for. And, most ominously, about half of the soldiers surveyed indicated they will not reenlist when their tours end and the Pentagon lifts the "stop-loss order" now in place, which prevents troops from retiring or leaving the service when their enlistment contract expires.

Were it not for this stop-loss policy, which even high-ranking officials admit is inconsistent with the principles of voluntary service, the AVF and the Total Force [i.e., heavy reliance on Guard and Reserve units for post-conflict operations] would be in severe jeopardy, lacking the peronnel to complete their missions. For example, as one infantry battallion commander deployed in Kuwait and headed for Iraq recently told The Army Times he would have lost a quarter of his unit in the coming year had it not been for the order. Through a series of such stop-loss measures, the army has prevented 24,000 active-duty troops and 16,000 reservists from leaving its ranks. Yet even with these rules in place, the Army Reserve missed its reenlistment goals for fiscal year 2003.
 
Few join the military to fight... most want to quit when they have to.


But yes it shows some of the many problems this will develop into. I think we need more detachment sooner, and just use special ops teams to do raids to help the local police or something like that. The US military anyway is not a police force, and it does much better at what it is trained to do.
 
It certainly doesn't help morale when Bush has a marked reduction in veteran benefits as part of his 2005 budget, as well as benefits for active duty soldiers in the 2003 and 2004 budgets.
 
Come on now. I'm sure they're reasons for leaving have everything to do with the skyrocketing job market and are completely unrelated to people dying on a daily basis over in Iraq.
 
Of course, it doesn't mention that re-enlistment for FY2003 was exceeded for every other military service than the army reserves.

Spend a little time to look up the real story of enlistment. Go straight to the source and read whats coming out of Stars and Stripes and the various government publications. The Rand corporation actually has a very interesting study on retention--strangely active duty with combat has historically improved enlistment rates. Its available for free on their website. It also discusses what soldiers say they will do and what they actually do, which is particularly apropos to the claim that "50% say they will not re-up".
 
RussSchultz said:
Of course, it doesn't mention that re-enlistment for FY2003 was exceeded for every other military service than the army reserves.

Spend a little time to look up the real story of enlistment. Go straight to the source and read whats coming out of Stars and Stripes and the various government publications. The Rand corporation actually has a very interesting study on retention--strangely active duty with combat has historically improved enlistment rates. Its available for free on their website.

Link please?
 
Sorry, too busy today. Its up to the reader as an exercise.

We've talked about this before, though. Go look through the archives, or try Google. Its your friend.
 
RussSchultz said:
Sorry, too busy today. Its up to the reader as an exercise.

We've talked about this before, though. Go look through the archives, or try Google. Its your friend.

I just want to make sure I'm reading the same documents you are. Be it far from me to look up documents that dispute what you claim, and you accuse yet again of "not going to the source." :rolleyes: ;)
 
Sxotty said:
Few join the military to fight... most want to quit when they have to.

A lot of people, believe it or not, do join the military to defend their home country and would be far from reluctant to fight if the US were concretely under attack or even under a credible threat of attack.
 
Bolloxoid said:
Sxotty said:
Few join the military to fight... most want to quit when they have to.

A lot of people, believe it or not, do join the military to defend their home country and would be far from reluctant to fight if the US were concretely under attack or even under a credible threat of attack.
One of the biggest mistakes ive made in life was not following up to join the navy after high school. My mom thought that illegal aliens couldnt serve and it might be used to deport me from the US. Found out later that they could. I would have gladly gone to war for this country. Wouldnt be worth it if your not willing to fight for it.

later,
epic
 
ya idea defending your country is what sells most people on the miltary, when they find out they are being used for ulterior motives it tends to break the apeal of service.
 
kyleb said:
ya idea defending your country is what sells most people on the miltary, when they find out they are being used for ulterior motives it tends to break the apeal of service.
Im sure thats true from time to time. Doesnt mean we are excused from some public service. ;)

later,
epic
 
epicstruggle said:
kyleb said:
ya idea defending your country is what sells most people on the miltary, when they find out they are being used for ulterior motives it tends to break the apeal of service.
Im sure thats true from time to time. Doesnt mean we are excused from some public service. ;)

later,
epic

it does if you are a woman...
 
kyleb said:
ya idea defending your country is what sells most people on the miltary, when they find out they are being used for ulterior motives it tends to break the apeal of service.


and what would that alterior purpose be?
 
Legion said:
kyleb said:
ya idea defending your country is what sells most people on the miltary, when they find out they are being used for ulterior motives it tends to break the apeal of service.


and what would that alterior purpose be?

To hunt down gays and bring them to Bush's personal torture chamber, don't you know.
 
Sxotty said:
Few join the military to fight... most want to quit when they have to.


But yes it shows some of the many problems this will develop into. I think we need more detachment sooner, and just use special ops teams to do raids to help the local police or something like that. The US military anyway is not a police force, and it does much better at what it is trained to do.

I think they would fight if there was a reason to fight, and not some "pretending to be saving those who want us out" one day give them water and the other get killed by the same.

Well, what else could be expected from this expedition except I think it is really important -to lessen the damage that has been done- that you do what you came there to do, and that is to rebuild the country, no matter what it takes.

Bush supporters should have been thinking about the effects before the war was started.
 
Back
Top