The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Current Events

Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-28-2004, 11:55 PM   #1
marichiko
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Here we go again (How many of you can say "Saigon"?)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army is planning an involuntary mobilization of thousands of reserve troops to maintain adequate force levels in Iraq and Afghanistan, defense officials said on Monday.
The move -- involving the seldom-tapped Individual Ready Reserve -- represents the latest evidence of the strain being placed on the U.S. military, particularly the Army, by operations in those two countries.
Reuters: Roughly 5,600 soldiers from the ready reserve will be notified of possible deployment this year, including some soldiers who will be notified within a month, said an Army official speaking on condition of anonymity...
Army officials are in the process of briefing members of Congress on the mobilization and plan a formal announcement on Wednesday.
The Army official said the mobilization "will be through the rest of the year. Some could be within a month."
"It would be an involuntary measure, an involuntary mobilization," the Army official said. "It's approximately 5,600."
The official said military police and civil affairs personnel were among the specialties involved...
"Sometimes there's a misperception by some of the individuals ... that 'I've done my obligation, I've been in the Army, thank you very much, and I'm done'. But you're not done," the official said.
Attached Images
 
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 09:11 AM   #2
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
The definition of an American Patriot is found in innovation. The new Ford SUV gets over 30 MPG because patriots are being enpowered by William Clay Ford. Its not just about SUVs. Its about whether you avocate the destruction of America - keep buying the same crap do to MBA stifled technologies - or whether you promote what has always made America great - innovative ideas from the product people.

Those who love the status quo include supporter of a mental midget president. What was this fool's solution to our excessive energy consumption? We need to find and burn more energy - a classic example of a brain dead anti-innovator who is also an MBA.

The displayed poster is a sound byte representing a larger problem. The SUV is the classic example of 1968 technology repackaged to entice the naive. At 12 MPG, the SUV does not even get the mileage 1960 cars. It exists because we keep voting for anti-innovators. We vote for who runs this economy by what we buy. Do you buy the Hummer that is exactly what the Humvee is not - or do you buy Hondas, Toyotas, and the new Ford? Innovators - also known as patriots - do not think like the mental midget president. Instead they buy innovation - to advance mankind - and to make such future wars unnecessary.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 09:43 AM   #3
Kitsune
still eats dirt
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 3,031
The official said military police and civil affairs personnel were among the specialties involved.

I get the feeling this might not be because the military is strained, but maybe because we are now officially in a different phase of the war? It seems like they are now shifting to do more traditional police work, training of the Iraqi authorities, etc.

Hell, this might even give those who are currently deployed a much needed break.

Just as long as we don't see an article that reads "involuntary mobilization of thousands of citizens..."
Kitsune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 12:05 PM   #4
marichiko
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by Kitsune
The official said military police and civil affairs personnel were among the specialties involved.

Hell, this might even give those who are currently deployed a much needed break.

Just as long as we don't see an article that reads "involuntary mobilization of thousands of citizens..."
Well, it may or may not give those currently deployed a break. The article went on to say that tours of duty in the Middle East are also being extended for many for at least for another 3 months.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 02:06 PM   #5
lookout123
changed his status to single
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Right behind you. No, the other side.
Posts: 10,308
activating members currently in the IRR is not that big of a deal. no one enlists in the military without knowing about the obligation. you don't enlist for 4 years. it is an 8 year enlistment, across the board. they have the option of signing up for 2,3,4,6 year active tours.
the 8 year requirement in the IRR is a one shot deal. after you have completed 8 years of service, you are free and clear (except in officer retirements)

the military is a volunteer organization. period. in the last 13 years i have had complaints about getting sent places when i had other ideas, but i never lost sight of fact one; i signed an agreement of my own free will. there are many benefits to be gained, and with it some sacrifices are sure to come.
__________________
Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin
lookout123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 04:28 PM   #6
OnyxCougar
Junior Master Dwellar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Kingdom of Atlantia
Posts: 2,979
It IS a big deal, in the fact that we're now calling up a section of our population that hasn't needed to be used before....

It's only 5,600 people IIRC, so it's not that big a deal. YET. What happens when they have called up all the IRR?

The draft is coming. I got a letter from Elizabeth Dole, and both my Reps, and they all said the same thing... paraphrasing, "We won't call up the draft unless we have to, to insure national security."

You all know what that means.....
__________________

Impotentes defendere libertatem non possunt.

"Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth."
~Franklin D. Roosevelt
OnyxCougar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 04:39 PM   #7
lookout123
changed his status to single
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Right behind you. No, the other side.
Posts: 10,308
the military will fight that one as hard as anyone. those in power in the pentagon walked into a military that had been pulled down by forcing the unwilling to put on a uniform. as much as i love being the the military, i would have to consider getting out if the draft re-instated (as would many that i know)

to date recruiting numbers are on target. this is a political maneuver prepping us for increasing the size of the active duty population.

edit: as far as the IRR being untapped. you are correct; they are supposed to come behind the guard and reserve in mass deployments, but they have been recalled in small #'s over the last couple of years. i know 2 guys from one civilian office who have been recalled.
__________________
Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin
lookout123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 05:16 PM   #8
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
re·serve
tr.v. re·served, re·serv·ing, re·serves
To keep back, as for future use or for a special purpose.
To set or cause to be set apart for a particular person or use.

n.
Something kept back or saved for future use or a special purpose.

Isn't that what they're for?
Isn't that what they've been getting paid to be?

__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 05:26 PM   #9
marichiko
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by lookout123
the military will fight that one as hard as anyone. those in power in the pentagon walked into a military that had been pulled down by forcing the unwilling to put on a uniform. as much as i love being the the military, i would have to consider getting out if the draft re-instated (as would many that i know)

to date recruiting numbers are on target. this is a political maneuver prepping us for increasing the size of the active duty population.
It depends on the over-all willingness of the draftees. The US army in WWII was a pretty good fighting machine despite the fact that it consisted largely of draftees. When the draft was used to fight the highly unpopular Vietnam War, the average GI draftee was no more happy about it than the rest of the country, and as a result, pride in serving in the military reached a record low point. My father chose to retire from the military after his second tour in "Nam, in part because he was fed up with riding herd on a bunch of raw and unwilling recruits. His comments about the men under his command in Korea (another engagement where draftees were used) versus those he commanded in Vietnam were like the difference between night and day. I think the military finds the draft as acceptable as its soldiers find it to be.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 06:09 PM   #10
lookout123
changed his status to single
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Right behind you. No, the other side.
Posts: 10,308
Quote:
Originally posted by marichiko


It depends on the over-all willingness of the draftees. The US army in WWII was a pretty good fighting machine despite the fact that it consisted largely of draftees. When the draft was used to fight the highly unpopular Vietnam War, the average GI draftee was no more happy about it than the rest of the country, and as a result, pride in serving in the military reached a record low point. My father chose to retire from the military after his second tour in "Nam, in part because he was fed up with riding herd on a bunch of raw and unwilling recruits. His comments about the men under his command in Korea (another engagement where draftees were used) versus those he commanded in Vietnam were like the difference between night and day. I think the military finds the draft as acceptable as its soldiers find it to be.
different generations, different attitudes. all draftees are not created equal. being a draftee in WWII meant that you weren't in the regular army. the majority of the servicemen in WWII did volunteer. they went to war knowing that they didn't get to go home until the war was won. there generation was forged by the experiences of the depression. they knew what it was like to sacrifice. by the time viet nam rolled around we no longer viewed wars that way. war is now a conflict fought in rotations. it is more difficult to develop strong unit bonds with that type of culture, and even more difficult when people are brought in involuntarily. even more so now that the draft age generation is raised in an extremely pampered fashion. draftees in the modern US military are an extremely bad idea and professional soldiers recognize that they do not have a place in the modern military.
__________________
Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin
lookout123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2004, 06:21 PM   #11
marichiko
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I agree that the generation that came up under the depression was more used to deprivation, etc; that along with the fact that WWII was generally considered a "just" war did make a big difference. However, it wasn't only the willingness of the draftee that made for problems in Vietnam. The military itself made a major mistake in the way in which it rotated men in and out of outfits. In Korea and WWII, a man would be shipped out with his same outfit and barring death or wounds, remain with them throughout the entire engagement. In Vietnam, the army rotated men in and out of units as individuals. Thus, a man who had only been "in country" three days might find himself fighting beside a man who was due to go back state side in the next week. This led to an almost complete lack of cohesion among units and was very demoralizing to the individual GI. The top military brass made their mistakes, as well; you can't dump the entire blame on the individual soldier who usually fought with great courage and valor.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2004, 07:02 AM   #12
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
Quote:
Originally posted by lookout123
different generations, different attitudes. all draftees are not created equal. being a draftee in WWII meant that you weren't in the regular army. the majority of the servicemen in WWII did volunteer. they went to war knowing that they didn't get to go home until the war was won.
Different generation - same attitude. Those who first went to VietNam had the same attitude as those who went to WWII. But something changed - sharply - in VietNam. Even the troops who were sent in Nixon's time knew there was something wrong. Obviously. This is what happens to the troops when there is no smoking gun.

150 of us were taken to the induction center. Only 17 were physically fit for military duty. Why? They told us up front in the induction center that they would do everything possible to keep us from being inducted. Yes you are reading that right. Because of the lies from the Nixon administration, even the Lt at the induction center told us they would do everything possible to help us be declared unfit for military service.

A friend smoked and drank heavily the night before just to make sure his blood pressure would be too high. But the doctors kept putting down a blood pressure number that was lower. He went to the Sgt complaining. The Sgt took one look as his BP numbers and said, "Son. If they put down what your blood pressure really was, then the army would assume you had manipulated the numbers and draft you." The induction center made sure the BP number was one that would guarantee a rejection from military service.

Things got so bad in Nam that mail sent TO the troops was also censored. Nixon feared troops would learn too much about why we were there. But it really was too late. Troops were not there to liberate the people - as they discovered when in country. Troops were not in Vietnam for the same reason that we fought WWII. American troops in Vietnam were the enemy. And so the famous expression, "We have met the enemy and he is us". During WWII, American troops truly were liberating people. Big difference in attitude because top management was lying during VietNam.

Even tenants of the Hanoi Hilton noted the difference with the newer soldiers. They were not in Vietnam to win the war. Under the lying Richard Nixon, the objective was only to get out alive. Because the president was lying, then Americans were only prolonging a war of independence while making enemies of one of America's formally closest friends. Makes a big difference in the attitude of the troops when the top leadership even lies. Eventually those lies even filter down to troop moral and how the troops fight. In Nam, you fought only to protect your buddy and to get your ass home. In WWII, troops fought because Americans truly feared for their way of life - because America really was threatened. Because a smoking gun existed - Pearl Harbor and Germany's declaration of war on the US.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2004, 10:11 AM   #13
marichiko
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I think tw is right on in his accessment of troop morale as the Vietnam War progressed. My Dad did his first tour over there right after Kennedy was assasinated when Lyndon Johnson was at the helm. He came back from the experience with as reasonable an outlook as can be expected from any man who has just returned from a war. He did his second tour in the Nixon era around the time of Kent State. I could see a marked difference in him upon his return home. He showed all the signs of someone with PTSD and had vivid nightmares where he would wake my Mother and I up with his screams. This was a man who had seen combat in Burma and Europe, Korea, and Vietnam once before. For him to show such a profound stress reaction after his second tour, tells me that things had deteriorated sharply from the beginning of that war.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2004, 12:59 PM   #14
jdbutler
If ya cant take a joke, Effya!
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 288
I agree with lookout's philosophy. I was a 21 year old grunt during the "Tet Agression" of 1968. Our soldiers never lost a major battle during that entire war, despite what the revisionist lefties preach. The Viet Cong effectively ceased to exist after that uprising. And I recall morale being rather high among the troops during my tour of duty. The dope smoking and racial tensions began during the Nixon Administration. But to compare soldiers from different eras is not the point. Todays military is all volunteer and they have signed a contract:

contract
1) n. an agreement with specific terms between two or more persons or entities in which there is a promise to do something in return for a valuable benefit known as consideration. Since the law of contracts is at the heart of most business dealings, it is one of the three or four most significant areas of legal concern and can involve variations on circumstances and complexities. The existence of a contract requires finding the following factual elements: a) an offer; b) an acceptance of that offer which results in a meeting of the minds; c) a promise to perform; d) a valuable consideration (which can be a promise or payment in some form); e) a time or event when performance must be made (meet commitments); f) terms and conditions for performance, including fulfilling promises; g) performance, if the contract is "unilateral". A unilateral contract is one in which there is a promise to pay or give other consideration in return for actual performance.

In addition, all assignment orders given in the military come with a proviso called "Or in accordance with the Army's needs" which simply put means "We don't give a fuck what you signed up for, this is what you are going to do...

All of todays military realize these facts, have agreed to them, and are aware of their choices and obligations. God bless them and keep them safe. Hoo-Rah!
__________________
Phineas J. Twunt
jdbutler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2004, 09:26 PM   #15
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
Contract: everyone will work for the government and the government will provide everything required. Good contract until exercised in practice. It was called communism.

Contacts alone don't make things right or make things work. Communism failed because the contract was defective in principle.

All unions have contract with their employeers. But which unions are productive? The ones who work for honest and fair employers. Employers who really want to be productive as opposed to employers who only have self serving agendas.

Same applies to soldiers. No contract can nor should ever be expected to make good soldiers. Good soldiers require honest, responsbile and intelligent top management. When top management lies (as Nixon did repeatedly), it eventually results in bad soldiers as happened in VietNam. There was nothing wrong with the American soldier in Vietnam - other than who they were working for.

The American soldier won virtually every battle in Vietnam. But the war was lost because the liar was back in Washington undermining anything those soldiers might accomplish. And so we say 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management.

Anyone who would vote for George Jr would only vote to undermine the American soldier. Too many more years of outright lies and deception by the current administration can only result in more Vietnams. The American soldier does not deserve that.

Last edited by tw; 07-01-2004 at 09:28 PM.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:24 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.