Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Troops under stop-loss conditions

  1. Jun 3, 2004 #1
    "This is supposed to be an all-volunteer military," said Jessica Salamon, who has been to therapy and has seen her dream of starting a family deferred. "They're not volunteering when they're told they can't leave."

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10961-2004Jun2.html

    Soldiers Facing Extended Tours
    Critics of Army Policy Liken It to a Draft

    By Josh White
    Washington Post Staff Writer - Thursday, June 3, 2004; Page A01

    (quote)Army officials announced yesterday that thousands of active-duty and reserve soldiers who are nearing the end of their volunteer service commitments could be forced to serve an entire tour overseas if their units are chosen for deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan.

    The order applies to all Army soldiers who are deployed in the future and means that many troops could face extended terms in the military after their formal contracts expire. The Army had previously issued such orders on a unit-by-unit basis, as troops deployed. Now, all soldiers are on notice that if their units are called into the fight, they will go -- and stay.(end quote)

    more in link.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 3, 2004 #2
    Huh?? So if a soldier wants to leave before their time is up, they should be able to????
    Just go in while you can get the benefits, and get out when you see signs of war coming?

    The facts are that part of that voluntary contract includes serving extended time at the government's disposal.



     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2004
  4. Jun 3, 2004 #3
    Read the article: Soldiers can't leave WHEN their time is up.
     
  5. Jun 3, 2004 #4

    kat

    User Avatar

    Read their contract. An extension is part of it. This is nothing new. It was changed as a result of the abject failure of individual soldier rotations in Vietnam. Anyone who has ever had any experience witht he military knows this. It's really a great example of unfair/biased reporting that ignores or selectively reports the facts. It would be stupid and unfair to the other soldiers to do it any other way AND furthermore, would almost certainly result in higher deaths.
     
  6. Jun 3, 2004 #5

    amp

    User Avatar

    Thats true - the extension - is part of their contract. But for up to a year after, I don't think thats written in there, Kat. Besides the Stop-loss policy is just a stop-gap measure to keep from going to the draft during an election year.
     
  7. Jun 3, 2004 #6

    jimmy p

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I dont think this is the same, but when my Dad left the Army, he was still on call for another 6 years, in which time if there was a war and soldiers needed to be called up, he would be liable for active service. Am I right in thinking that these soldiers are STILL out on tour?
     
  8. Jun 3, 2004 #7

    kat

    User Avatar

    Your wrong Amp, they are two different issues. The republicans have never pushed a draft, in fact Rumsfield has always been very, and vocally so, against drafting an inexperienced force. It's the democrats who are pushing the draft.
    They STILL would go for extended service until they had UNITS that they could rotate as opposed to individuals. The only way around this is to completely revamp the way that run today. That of course, as you know would take TIIIIMEEE. Still requiring extended service, until then!
    SO, to sum up...They allowed for extended service, again, because of the abject failure of rotating inexperienced individuals in and out of combat zones. It disrupts the cohesion of the unit and endangers them all.
     
  9. Jun 3, 2004 #8

    kat

    User Avatar

    Yes, Jimmy P. These soldiers are still out on tour and are can be called back into service for an extended period of time and/or have their service extended. It's part of their contract. Has been for a very long time.
     
  10. Jun 3, 2004 #9

    Show me where it says an extension of 12 months is the max.
    I have already posted the clear guidlines at which people can be extended almost indefinitely.
     
  11. Jun 3, 2004 #10

    Read my reply.
    The lady made a stupid generalized statement, and apparently didn't read her contract either.
     
  12. Jun 3, 2004 #11

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    To clarify what others have already said, when someone enlists in the US military, they have an 8 year contract which includes some time (3-4 years generally) of active duty and the remainder in inactive reserve during which time they can be called back into active service.

    Sometimes people don't pay enough attention to what they are volunteering for or change their minds after a few years.
     
  13. Jun 3, 2004 #12
    Yes, Thanks Russ. I understand.

    The new policy does not apply to the Marine Corps, which has more than 25,000 marines deployed in the two countries, or to the Navy or the Air Force.
    Russ, do you know why not?
     
  14. Jun 3, 2004 #13

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    The Marine Corps is the smallest of the forces (its actually a division of the Navy) and rarely ever has trouble filling its ranks. It applies only to the army because they are the biggest service and have the biggest retention problem.

    Also, I knew guys who were called back into the Navy soon after 9/11 - its just a lot more common in the Army.
     
  15. Jun 4, 2004 #14
    A simple way out: start pretending to talk in your sleep. In our military, anyone who talks in his/her sleep is not fit for duties in which they might possibly reveal information to the enemy, such as in combat zones.
     
  16. Jun 4, 2004 #15
    wow! That's, a little, crazy! I mean, I understand the reasoning, but it was my impression from reading online that a great many people talk in their sleep at some point.
     
  17. Jun 4, 2004 #16
    This applies to the Marine Corps also. I am the son of a Marine and have grown up around active duty and retired Marines. They also can and will be recalled to service if the need be. Also not very many people read the fine print when they join the service they just use it as a way to pay for college or get settled after graduating high school, so when something big happens where they need to go do their job they start trying to avoid doing it and let down their comrades because they feel that the conflict they are being sent to is unjust. That is not their decision to be making they need to follow orders and do the job they were assigned to do.
     
  18. Jun 4, 2004 #17
    Yes, many people do. I, however, was not allowed to. Silly as it may be, it was against regulations for me to talk in my sleep, sleep-walk, or have any form of anaesthetic without a superior officer present.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Troops under stop-loss conditions
  1. Supporting US Troops (Replies: 2)

Loading...