Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Former U.S. soldiers balk at new Iraq, Afghan duty
sandiego union/reuters ^ | sep 28, 04 | reuters

Posted on 09/28/2004 7:00:51 PM PDT by churchillbuff

WASHINGTON – Thirty percent of former U.S. soldiers who have been called back to duty involuntarily to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan have failed to report on time, and eight have been declared AWOL, the Army said Tuesday.

The Army's problem with mobilizing soldiers from the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), a seldom-tapped personnel pool, is another sign of the difficulty the Pentagon is encountering in maintaining troop levels in Iraq and Afghanistan.

So far, the Army has mobilized 3,664 people from the IRR to active duty, but 1,085 have not reported on time to the Army post to which they were assigned, said Julia Collins, a spokeswoman for the Army Human Resources Command.

The Individual Ready Reserve is made up of 111,000 people who have completed their voluntary Army service commitments and have returned to civilian life but remain eligible to be mobilized in a national emergency. Many have been out of the active-duty military for years.

Eight of those recently ordered back to active duty have been listed as absent without leave, or AWOL, and could face military criminal charges as deserters, Collins said. All eight have been notified they are being classified as AWOL and still refused to report for duty, Collins added.

In addition, their names will be entered into a national criminal investigation database, and they could be arrested if, for example, they are stopped by a police officer for a routine traffic violation, Collins said.

Six others had been listed as AWOL but have agreed to report after being contacted by the Army, Collins said.

EXEMPTION REQUESTS

About 85 percent of those who did not show up on time have formally requested that the Army exempt them from duty due to health issues or some other hardship, Collins said. Most of the others have requested a delay in their reporting date.

Most exemption requests are likely to be rejected, Collins said.

"I expect a small percent to be approved for exemption," Collins said. "The cases are so varied. You've got medical. You've got financial hardship. You've got sole caretaker for children or parents."

The Army provides an automatic 30-day delay in the reporting date when someone applies for exemption or delay, Collins said.

Looking to address shortfalls in certain military skills in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army announced in June it planned to mobilize about 5,600 soldiers from the IRR, and conceded that some might be shocked to learn they are being ordered back to active duty. The rest of the 5,600 are due to be summoned by December.

Most of those mobilized from the IRR are reporting to Fort Jackson in South Carolina, but others also are reporting to Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri, Fort Sill in Oklahoma, Fort Knox in Kentucky and Fort Benning in Georgia, Collins said.

This marks the first large-scale mobilization from the IRR since the Gulf War of 1991.

The Army, stretched thin as the United States fights wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has struggled to maintain force levels in those war zones. It has relied heavily on part-time soldiers from the National Guard and Reserve, and last spring kept thousands of soldiers in Iraq months longer than they had been promised.

It also has issued "stop-loss" orders preventing tens of thousands of soldiers designated to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan from leaving the military if their volunteer service commitment ends during their deployment.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: iraq; irr

1 posted on 09/28/2004 7:00:51 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
I get flamed for expressing concerns that a draft is in our future. sorry, but if you read articles like this without preconceptions or ideologically tinted glasses, it's hard not to be concerned.

"""The Army, stretched thin as the United States fights wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has struggled to maintain force levels in those war zones. It has relied heavily on part-time soldiers from the National Guard and Reserve, and last spring kept thousands of soldiers in Iraq months longer than they had been promised."""

2 posted on 09/28/2004 7:02:56 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

THIS MESSAGE FORWARDED BY: http://Vets4Bush.com



Greetings Fellow Veterans for Bush!

There are rumors floating around on the Internet that the President is considering re-instating the draft. John Kerry has decided to latch onto this rumor, and continues to use scare tactics to try to make this rumor an issue in the campaign. His language is reckless, and could not be further from the truth. Here is a message from Bush Campaign headquarters refuting this Kerry campaign attempt to scare Americans. Please pass on to friends, family, fellow veterans and contacts.

Jeff Gault

Chair, Virginia Veterans for Bush









President Bush Says No Draft



“No, we're not going -- we don't need the draft. Look, the all-volunteer Army is working. The all-volunteer Army… I know Senator McCain and I agree on this issue for certain, the all-volunteer Army works.”



~ President George W. Bush, August 10, 2004



President Bush is committed to keeping participation in the United States Armed Services voluntary. The President’s cabinet has stated that a draft is not being considered. Recruitment and retention rates remain strong, and the military has not had any problem maintaining a strong force. President Bush is confident in the current state of the military and has assured that Nation that the all-volunteer military force is working well.



President Bush’s Administration has Remained Consistent on the Draft



ü Vice President Cheney says all volunteer force “works extraordinarily well.”

“I don't foresee a situation in which we'd want to go back to the draft. We made a decision after Vietnam to go with an all-volunteer force… The all-volunteer force has produced an absolutely remarkable group of men and women in the service. And I think it works. It works extraordinarily well. And I'm a great believer in it… I suppose, at some point down the road we'd have such a national crisis or emergency, but it would have to be on the scale of World War II before I would think that anybody would seriously contemplate the possibility of going back again to the draft. I think what we have works very well.” (Vice President Cheney, Oregon City, OR, September, 17, 2004)



ü Secretary Rumsfeld calls suggestion of Bush initiated draft “nonsense.”

When asked if by the Armed Services Committee about initiating the draft, Secretary Rumsfeld replied, “That is absolute nonsense… It’s absolutely false that anyone in this administration is considering reinstituting the draft.” (Donald Rumsfeld, Senate Armed Services Committee, September 23, 2004)





John Kerry is using the draft to scare young voters and veterans.

During campaign stops, John Kerry has worked to scare voters by suggesting that President Bush will initiate a draft. “If George Bush were to be re-elected, given the way he has gone about this war and given his avoidance of responsibility in North Korea and Iran and other places, is [a draft] possible? I can't tell you.” (John Kerry, September 22, 2004)






Content Paid for by Bush-Cheney,'04, Inc.










Please do not accidentally unsubscribe from the list.










3 posted on 09/28/2004 7:07:14 PM PDT by campfollower (What did Kerry do? Called 1-800-HANOI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

Could be, but I think we'd see troops moved from Germany/S Korea to Iraq first.

MY search of the NY Times archives came with a series of articles documenting US GIs actually holding street protests, IN EUROPE, over not being sent back home soon enough... post-WWII.

There seems to be some grumbling at this point, but we're nowhere near anything like street protests.


4 posted on 09/28/2004 7:08:54 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

Most contracts include a period of time for which a servicemember serves in the IRR. During that time the individual is subject to recall to active duty. Is there more to this report?


5 posted on 09/28/2004 7:15:31 PM PDT by petertare (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

3,600 callups back to active duty out of the inactive reserves of 110,000 [your numbers] and you're hitting the panic button?

3,600? And this number somehow lets you justify a worry about the draft coming back? Please... but that's just silly. They call back some people that have specific training that is in need at a particular point in time. This is not a crisis, and it does in fact happen all the time.

There were also a large (I don't remember the number offhand) number of IIR called up for Gulf War 1, and as it would happen I was very nearly one of them. A good bud of mine (same rate, rank, and time) was called back in (after he got out) to do duty in port security in Saudi. I was jealous... and even called to find out how I might be called in... but the billets were filled. Dang the bad luck.

There won't be a draft. We don't *need* the millions of troops from a draft. Volunteer enlistment quotas are being met, and then some.


6 posted on 09/28/2004 7:19:12 PM PDT by Ramius (Time? What time do you think we have?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: campfollower

Thanks for your post. I'm glad of this:
"President Bush is committed to keeping participation in the United States Armed Services voluntary." But I'm reading articles (such as the one I posted here) that seem to conflict with this: "Recruitment and retention rates remain strong, and the military has not had any problem maintaining a strong force." If the latter statement is not, in fact, accurate, the president's confidence that we won't have a draft may be a little overly optimistic.


7 posted on 09/28/2004 7:21:46 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

This is a non story. The percentage actually not showing up is small. The others are trying for deferals. The only people I have heard talking about the draft are Democrats.


8 posted on 09/28/2004 7:22:40 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dalebert

so what is new...... nothing .... no body really wants to go to war.... but it is your duty........


9 posted on 09/28/2004 7:39:47 PM PDT by Gibtx (Wow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

The soldiers that they are talking about are Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) Soldiers. The IRR is a pool of reserve soldiers who do not drill on a regular basis. Many of them have been on active duty but haven't met their complete commitment time. Some are just reservists between units. They are generally meant to be individual augmentees for active duty units. I, for instance, am assigned to CENTCOM HQ (I was recalled to active duty for the Gulf War as well). The IRR system was neglected for years and only recently has an effort been made to update it. Nobody was keeping track of the people in the IRR and many people moved without providing a forwarding address - some of the no shows probably didn't get the notice. People can defer their call up and some can get out of it altogether. Sometimes the IRR can be a dumping ground for reserve soldiers who don't show up for drills in a regular reserve unit. These people may be some of those not showing up now.

As far as a draft, that may be the only way to fill the ranks if Kerry is elected. Won't be the case if President Bush is re-elected.


10 posted on 09/28/2004 7:43:03 PM PDT by CCPlanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

There will never be a draft again in the United States.

After the pardon of those who had criminally dodged the draft, there is absolutely no incentive to show up.

What are they going to do, prosecute a million people?

If you think the 60s was bad, you would be horrified at the reaction of the young adults to the thought of a draft.

Also, it could never pass Constitutional muster (as it discriminates against people based on gender).


11 posted on 09/28/2004 7:56:19 PM PDT by Tuco Ramirez (Ideas have consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

I can't help but think that this announcement should have waited until after the election.


12 posted on 09/28/2004 7:57:01 PM PDT by Gator113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

Well, the question is if not a draft, where do we get the manpower?

The Pentagon is saying more troops are likely needed to stabilize the situation in Iraq, which means delayed rotations to build up manpower, the Pentagon is also saying it will have to cut tour lengths from a year to 8 months to achieve acceptable reenlistment rates.

The White House is saying that we will not allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons, but the Iranians have done the obvious, decentralizing the processing and locating the small numbers of centrifuges in multiple locates in urban areas – they are spinning up uranium hexafluoride the way Chicagoans made bathtub gin, and our chances of enforcing probation by air power alone are about as good as Elliot Nesses'.

Assuming, that is, that we actually know where the production is located – we admit that we have lost track of such facilities in North Korea).

So if we really intend to "Walk the Walk" on this issue, we are discussing the occupation of Tehran, and probably lots of other places in Iran, which means a lot more troops.

And even if we are bluffing, we are stretched to the limit by the occupation of Iraq, and if hell break losses anywhere else...

Seems to me that Republicans and Democrats alike are promising victory without sacrifice for the vast majority of Americans.

And I just don’t see how these books can balance.


13 posted on 09/28/2004 7:58:13 PM PDT by M. Dodge Thomas (More of the same, only with more zeros on the end.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

Only 8 AWOL...thats it?

I think we had 15 guys AWOL on one plane load going to RVN

Back in 67 at Ft Campbell I think they probably had 8 guys a night go AWOL...

There is a war on...this kind of thing probably happend in the American Revolution, The Civil War WWI , WWII and Korea....

8 troops AWOL....not a big deal

imo


14 posted on 09/28/2004 8:21:48 PM PDT by joesnuffy (If you can read this tagline...thank the "Big Blogger")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

...only eight AWOLs in our whole armed forces? There were several AWOLs in my initial training company of a little more than 100 recruits. And in that small unit, we lost more than 10% to suicides/attempts and stress fractures during Phase I (first eight weeks).

Eight AWOLs for a whole country is nothing.

And all enlistment requirements for 2004 are filled.

Hey, if we are surprised by attacks from several evil regimes, there will be a draft regardless of which man is in the Office of the President. But if Kerry gets into that Office, there will be a draft soon even without such attacks.

Almost all soldiers do not want Kerry to be our president, and very few young men would enlist if were to get that Office. Kerry, like any who would vote for him, is too much of a pansy, and everyone knows it.

For Commander-in-Chief, our country wants President Bush, and he's the only President our people will accept for national security.


15 posted on 09/28/2004 11:22:42 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

8 AWOL and you're ready to say there's a draft coming?
You really are pushing the DNC position hard to make that conclusion here.


16 posted on 09/29/2004 10:14:40 AM PDT by Darksheare (Hey DU, if I buy your servers, you'll have to be polite to me and call me your LORD AND MASTER.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tuco Ramirez
Also, it could never pass Constitutional muster (as it discriminates against people based on gender).

Which amendment prohibits discrimination based on Gender?

17 posted on 09/29/2004 10:20:13 AM PDT by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on gender (among other things).


18 posted on 09/29/2004 1:56:24 PM PDT by Tuco Ramirez (Ideas have consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

What is mildly amusing. if it were not all so serious, is that so many of us would like another go at it, and can not even get DOD to acknowledge a post, letter, call etc.

Yeah I'm in my 50s and that isn't pushups, but most of us could serve a useful purpose. As a retired reservist, I can shoot better that 98% of the new guys, could stand a post, ride shotgun on a convoy, or serve as batt C.O.; stick me in a staff billet, if you must, I've probably had more clearances than Rummy.

We have seen more than many, not likely to be subject to the usual ruses and can outthink most. Many of us can still meet the pt standards, and most would be willing to serve in any capacity, in any rank---geez I could tolerate the Air Force for 12 months.

C'mon DOD, you have no troop shortage of willing volunteers---there are long lines out here waiting to answer the bell--we understand this is the opening round in the fight for western civilization.


19 posted on 10/03/2004 8:58:35 PM PDT by petertare (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson