PDA

View Full Version : Army Forces 50,000 Soldiers into Extended Duty



DLR'sCock
01-31-2006, 11:29 AM
Army Forces 50,000 Soldiers into Extended Duty
By Will Dunham
Reuters

Sunday 29 January 2006

The U.S. Army has forced about 50,000 soldiers to continue serving after their voluntary stints ended under a policy called "stop-loss," but while some dispute its fairness, court challenges have fallen flat.

The policy applies to soldiers in units due to deploy for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. The Army said stop-loss is vital to maintain units that are cohesive and ready to fight. But some experts said it shows how badly the Army is stretched and could further complicate efforts to attract new recruits.

"As the war in Iraq drags on, the Army is accumulating a collection of problems that cumulatively could call into question the viability of an all-volunteer force," said defense analyst Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute think tank.

"When a service has to repeatedly resort to compelling the retention of people who want to leave, you're edging away from the whole notion of volunteerism."

When soldiers enlist, they sign a contract to serve for a certain number of years, and know precisely when their service obligation ends so they can return to civilian life. But stop-loss allows the Army, mindful of having fully manned units, to keep soldiers on the verge of leaving the military.

Under the policy, soldiers who normally would leave when their commitments expire must remain in the Army, starting 90 days before their unit is scheduled to depart, through the end of their deployment and up to another 90 days after returning to their home base.

With yearlong tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, some soldiers can be forced to stay in the Army an extra 18 months.

Hardship for Some Soldiers

Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty, an Army spokesman, said that "there is no plan to discontinue stop-loss."

"We understand that this is causing hardship for some individual soldiers, and we take individual situations into consideration," Hilferty said.

Hilferty said there are about 12,500 soldiers in the regular Army, as well as the part-time National Guard and Reserve, currently serving involuntarily under the policy, and that about 50,000 have had their service extended since the program began in 2002. An initial limited use of stop-loss was expanded in subsequent years to affect many more.

"While the policies relative to the stop-loss seem harsh, in terms of suspending scheduled separation dates (for leaving the Army), they are not absolute," Hilferty said. "And we take individual situations into consideration for compelling and compassionate reasons."

Hilferty noted the Army has given "exceptions" to 210 enlisted soldiers "due to personal hardship reasons" since October 2004, allowing them to leave as scheduled.

"The nation is at war and we are stop-lossing units deploying to a combat theater to ensure they mobilize, train, deploy, fight, redeploy and demobilize as a team," he said.

No Luck in Court

A few soldiers have gone to court to challenge stop-loss.

One such case fizzled last week, when U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth in Washington dismissed a suit filed in 2004 by two Army National Guard soldiers. The suit claimed the Army fraudulently induced soldiers to enlist without specifying that their service might be involuntarily extended.

Courts also have backed the policy's legality in Oregon and California cases.

Jules Lobel, a University of Pittsburgh law professor who represented the National Guard soldiers, said a successful challenge to stop-loss was still possible.

"I think the whole stop-loss program is a misrepresentation to people of how long they're going to actually serve. I think it's caused tremendous morale problems, tremendous psychological damage to people," Lobel said.

"When you sign up for the military, you're saying, 'I'll give you, say, six years and then after six years I get my life back.' And they're saying, 'No, really, we can extend you indefinitely."'

Congressional critics have assailed stop-loss, and 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry called it "a back-door draft." The United States abolished the draft in 1973, but the all-volunteer military never before has been tested by a protracted war.

A report commissioned by the Pentagon called stop-loss a "short-term fix" enabling the Army to meet ongoing troop deployment requirements, but said such policies "risk breaking the force as recruitment and retention problems mount." It was written by Andrew Krepinevich, a retired Army officer.

Thompson added, "The persistent use of stop-loss underscores the fact that the war-fighting burden is being carried by a handful of soldiers while the vast majority of citizens incur no sacrifice at all."

-------

Nickdfresh
01-31-2006, 01:42 PM
I guess it really sucks to be in the military these days....

FORD
01-31-2006, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I guess it really sucks to be in the military these days....

I feel for the guys who were already in when Chimpy was court appointed on 12/12/2000, and for those who went in after 9/11, believing they would actually be defending their country from a real threat.

Maybe it's time those guys (or at least the ones still alive) should be allowed to come home, and be replaced with Busheep chickenhawks (including those in the Whore media)?

If they want to keep a volunteer military, then let it truly be made up of those who volunteer to serve this Fraudministration's fucked up treasonous policies.

Guitar Shark
01-31-2006, 03:44 PM
Originally posted by FORD
I feel for the guys who were already in when Chimpy was court appointed on 12/12/2000, and for those who went in after 9/11, believing they would actually be defending their country from a real threat.

Maybe it's time those guys (or at least the ones still alive) should be allowed to come home, and be replaced with Busheep chickenhawks (including those in the Whore media)?

If they want to keep a volunteer military, then let it truly be made up of those who volunteer to serve this Fraudministration's fucked up treasonous policies.

OK, I'll bite. Who will determine who the "Busheep chickenhawks" are? :)

BITEYOASS
01-31-2006, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by FORD
I feel for the guys who were already in when Chimpy was court appointed on 12/12/2000, and for those who went in after 9/11, believing they would actually be defending their country from a real threat.

Maybe it's time those guys (or at least the ones still alive) should be allowed to come home, and be replaced with Busheep chickenhawks (including those in the Whore media)?

If they want to keep a volunteer military, then let it truly be made up of those who volunteer to serve this Fraudministration's fucked up treasonous policies.

Well I'm stuck in my one year extension until July 2007. It was suppose to end in July of this year, but those cunts in Admin fucked it up and IT'S BEEN TAKING SEVERAL MONTHS AND GUESS WHAT? IT STILL HASN'T BEEN FIXED!!!! :mad: Talk about a great way to get fucked after coming from Iraq! But there are some bright sides to it, I was deployed to SoCal for about 8 months in back in 2003 and back in 2004 I had a blast over in Hawaii for 3 weeks and having a learge breasted fiance wanting to jump your bones every chance you get is the greatest perk of all! :D I was also paid a hell of a lot more in the reserves, than I ever was in an active duty unit. But the downside is that I keep getting interrupted in the middle of a couple college semesters, that and having to go back to Yuma TWICE!!! :mad:

BITEYOASS
01-31-2006, 04:30 PM
To add a note to that, I've been in since 1998

FORD
01-31-2006, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
OK, I'll bite. Who will determine who the "Busheep chickenhawks" are? :)

4moronyears, AssVibe, and WarPig would be a few examples ;)

Warham
01-31-2006, 05:13 PM
Sharkie asked who's going to determine who the Busheep are, not who are the Busheep.

How do you know guys serving in the army aren't for Bush, instead of being liberal kool-aid drinking fans of Teddy Kennedy?

FORD
01-31-2006, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Sharkie asked who's going to determine who the Busheep are, not who are the Busheep.

How do you know guys serving in the army aren't for Bush, instead of being liberal kool-aid drinking fans of Teddy Kennedy?

Some of them may well be. And they can stay if they want to. Though I imagine even those poor deluded souls are tired of the stop loss bullshit and doing tours that are three times longer than they signed up for.

And Ted Kennedy has nothing to do with this.

4moreyears
01-31-2006, 05:29 PM
Originally posted by FORD
I feel for the guys who were already in when Chimpy was court appointed on 12/12/2000, and for those who went in after 9/11, believing they would actually be defending their country from a real threat.

Maybe it's time those guys (or at least the ones still alive) should be allowed to come home, and be replaced with Busheep chickenhawks (including those in the Whore media)?

If they want to keep a volunteer military, then let it truly be made up of those who volunteer to serve this Fraudministration's fucked up treasonous policies.

Bitch, Bitch, Bitch!!! Go watch Brokeback Mountain.

LoungeMachine
01-31-2006, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
Bitch, Bitch, Bitch!!! Go watch Brokeback Mountain.

How was it?

LoungeMachine
01-31-2006, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Sharkie asked who's going to determine who the Busheep are, not who are the Busheep.


Depends on what your definition of the word are, are. ;)


One very telling stat????

9 of 10 Iraq War Vets are running in 06 as DEMOCRATS.



Hmmmmm:cool:

LoungeMachine
01-31-2006, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by Warham
.

How do you know guys serving in the army aren't for Bush, instead of being liberal kool-aid drinking fans of Teddy Kennedy?


Jesus, I can see your fascination with Clinton, but this obsession you have w/ TK is mind boggling.

FORD
01-31-2006, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
Bitch, Bitch, Bitch!!! Go watch Brokeback Mountain.

Like I said, chickenshit chickenhawk..... when are you going over to put your ass on the line for the BCE you blindly worship?

Warham
01-31-2006, 05:44 PM
Obsession?

Don't you have an obsession with Bush?

If Kennedy wouldn't open his trap every five minutes to utter something absolutely preposterous, I wouldn't bring him up. He's an easy target.

He about blew a gasket today claiming that Alito was going to reverse every civil rights case ruled on by the Supreme Court over the last hundred years, perhaps even overturning a woman's right to vote.

He's insane. No wonder you guys try to keep him under wraps. It's not working too well.

FORD
01-31-2006, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Obsession?

Don't you have an obsession with Bush?

If Kennedy wouldn't open his trap every five minutes to utter something absolutely preposterous, I wouldn't bring him up. He's an easy target.

He about blew a gasket today claiming that Alito was going to reverse every civil rights case ruled on by the Supreme Court over the last hundred years, perhaps even overturning a woman's right to vote.

He's insane. No wonder you guys try to keep him under wraps. It's not working too well.

Maybe you should look into the Federalist Society and Opus Dei and see what they believe in. Scalito is a member of both, and he intends to impose their agendas on the court.

Warham
01-31-2006, 05:47 PM
The court needs to be farther to the right.

After that Wal-Mart case, I don't trust you liberals in the Court anymore. We need nine conservatives on the bench, not just five.

BITEYOASS
01-31-2006, 06:55 PM
Personally I'd like to say: THE DEMS AND REPUGS CAN GO FUCK THEMSELVES!!!! I'm voting for only 3'rd parties this year, Libertarian, Green, Constitution...whatever is available to stop the monopoly on power we have this year in November. On a side note, I'll also vote No on any Amendment in Alabama being put up for a vote. Especially since they have OVER 700 AMENDMENTS ON THE ALABAMA CONSTITUTION!!! Most having to do with providing favors to certain counties.

Cathedral
01-31-2006, 09:13 PM
Not to nitpick here but, Doesn't forcing them to stay kind of make it involuntary?
Or a better question, have any soldiers been held beyond their discharge date from the service?

I can see it not being an issue for those who still have time to serve since you have to be stationed somewhere.

But our National Guard units should never be held a day longer. they didn't sign up to be full time deployed soldiers or that's how they would have enlisted, right?

capnfrantic
02-01-2006, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by FORD


Maybe it's time those guys (or at least the ones still alive) should be allowed to come home, and be replaced with Busheep chickenhawks (including those in the Whore media)?



I don't want to know who the chickenhawks are, I want to know where they are... Damn this is sad.

FORD
02-01-2006, 12:51 AM
Originally posted by Cathedral
Not to nitpick here but, Doesn't forcing them to stay kind of make it involuntary?
Or a better question, have any soldiers been held beyond their discharge date from the service?

Documented in this very thread even. See the first post from "BITEYOASS".

I can see it not being an issue for those who still have time to serve since you have to be stationed somewhere.

But our National Guard units should never be held a day longer. they didn't sign up to be full time deployed soldiers or that's how they would have enlisted, right?

Not to mention they weren't trained for that sort of shit.

Now where's that picture of the truck full of reservists with the sign on it "One Weekend a Month MY ASS!!" ?

Douglas T.
02-01-2006, 01:07 AM
O.K. you guys keep up the good work here! Just thought I'd stop by since the Prez was on see what goes on here! Political correctness is good! PEACE and VOTE and all that cool stuff! To much for me ... catch ya in the other forums!
GOD BLESS th' US! and the DLR ARMY!

Cathedral
02-01-2006, 01:28 AM
Originally posted by FORD
Not to mention they weren't trained for that sort of shit.

Now where's that picture of the truck full of reservists with the sign on it "One Weekend a Month MY ASS!!" ?

Right here....

FORD
02-01-2006, 01:54 AM
Yep, that's the one. I dare the Guard to use that in a recruiting ad :D

LoungeMachine
02-01-2006, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by Warham
Obsession?

Don't you have an obsession with Bush?

If Kennedy blah, blah, blah......


I have a news flash for you Hamster...



ready....













BUSH IS THE PRESIDENT RIGHT NOW



Understand the differnce yet?

Nickdfresh
02-01-2006, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
Bitch, Bitch, Bitch!!! Go watch Brokeback Mountain.

Is it a realistic portrayal of a gay relationship? How'd you enjoy it? Did it have enough hot sex scenes for ya?'

DLR'sCock
02-01-2006, 10:13 AM
Bush is ther president right now, the Repukes control congress and now the Repukes control the Supreme Court....


Oh yeah, everything is Clintons fault....ok....

LoungeMachine
02-01-2006, 10:17 AM
LMMFAO

That's Warpig's takie all right.



Never mind Iraq / Enron / Abu Graib / DeLay / Libby / Abramoff / Cunningham / Ney / Frist / Herr Rumsfeld / Harriet Meiers / NSA / Record Deficits / And the Lowest approval numbers and highest vacation numbers.......


It's Clinton's fault [and Ted Kennedy's]

BigBadBrian
02-01-2006, 10:25 AM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine



It's Clinton's fault [and Ted Kennedy's]

....and John Kerry, Babs Boxers, Robert Byrd (D-KKK), et al.

:gulp:

Warham
02-01-2006, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
I have a news flash for you Hamster...



ready....













BUSH IS THE PRESIDENT RIGHT NOW



Understand the differnce yet?

Yep, and Kennedy is the current senator from Massachusetts. What's your point?

How does it feel having a guy like that in control of your agenda? Dingy Harry can't admit to it when he's interviewed by Major Garrett, but we all know it's true.

LoungeMachine
02-02-2006, 12:09 AM
Originally posted by Warham
Yep, and Kennedy is the current senator from Massachusetts. What's your point?

How does it feel having a guy like that in control of your agenda? Dingy Harry can't admit to it when he's interviewed by Major Garrett, but we all know it's true.

JESUS TITTIE FUCKING CHRIST YOU'RE STOOPID........DO YOU REALLY THINK THE SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS IS ON THE SAME POWER LEVEL OF THE POTUS ??????????????????????

That's my point, nimrod. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:



Is Teddy signing bills into law?

Is Teddy ordering NSA spy missions on us?

Is Teddy's staff performing perjury in front of Congress and Special Prosecuters?????

Idiot:rolleyes:

Warham
02-02-2006, 06:47 AM
I understand your anger, Lounge.

If he was running my party, I'd feel the same way.

FORD
02-02-2006, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by Warham
I understand your anger, Lounge.

If he was running my party, I'd feel the same way.

Teddy Kennedy isn't running the Democratic party. He's not even running the Senate.