Posted on 10/17/2004 2:52:58 PM PDT by Buddy B
Telegram from Army catches Prince George retiree off guard
By: BEN BAGWELL , Staff Writer 10/16/2004
PRINCE GEORGE - The U.S. Army informed a 57-year-old military retiree on Thursday that he will be granted a 30-day extension before he has to report for duty as a Ready Reservist en route to Iraq.
County resident Cleveland Rodgers, who served 36 years in the Army, was comfortably retired and was teaching supply soldiers at Fort Lee. He was enjoying civilian life and, despite some health concerns, the last thing he expected was to be recalled by the U.S. Army, having served in the Army until he was 55.
But this summer he received a surprise. A telegram said, as a part of a partial mobilization for Operation Iraqi Freedom, the retired master sergeant was to report for a period of active duty not to exceed 25 days for mobilization processing. He was expected to be at Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri by Oct. 20.
The Ready Reserves is a pool of individuals who have had training, served previously on active duty and who still have an obligation to serve if called. .....
(Excerpt) Read more at zwire.com ...
> You don't recall a 57 year old man, unless you're grasping at straws.
Or he has a very specific skill set unique to the present
situation.
I wouldn't be surprised to see retired Arabic-speakers
recalled either. We're rather short on them, too.
Has administrative error been ruled out here?
Anyway - in addition to some surprised retirees, there
are a lot of reservists who never thought they'd be in
combat. We are at war. This is going to distort many
personal plans, at least temporarily.
"and better air cover"
Actually, the Army is doing this in Iraq and are quite effective at it.
Great news! I am really so glad to hear this . I wish they would show us these kind of details more often.
I don't think so. When I got my DD-214 I still had six years to serve in the Inactive Reserve. I didn't get my discharge until those six years were up. They could have called me any time during those six years.
By the way, was this guy being paid to be in the reserve or was he just another double-dipper, with his mouth firmly planted on the teat of the government with a civilian job?
on the road again, just can't wait to get on the road again.....
Agreed.
We need to reconstitute the 8 active divisions we disbanded at the end of the Cold War. We are no longer at peace.
So9
You have a definite point, but I was responding more to the hand-wringing of the article with the obvious anti-Bush tone motivating it. I really do think our energies for the next 2 weeks need to be more directed toward winning the election, and we can push harder for more military bucks/soldiers, etc. after Bush wins. Kerry would be such a total disaster.
Understand your comments. However, warfare has really changed. We don't need a lot of folks to take apart an enemy. Ironically, we still do to occupy his territory once we've defeated him on the field. So, while I agree we need to increase our active duty numbers back to 1990 levels (2.1 million vice 1.4 now), we don't need them at the pointy end of the combat spear. Only if we're going to occupy for a long time, we'd do better now to concentrate on increasing the good Iraqi military forces.
The below from the newspaper story:
Telegram from Army catches Prince George retiree off guard
..."A document provided by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command in St. Louis said, "By law, retired soldiers are mobilization assets for life. Current Army policy removes you from mobilization and recall to active duty at age 60. However, volunteers may be recalled up to age 70. Retirees with critical skills may be recalled at any age."
Read: He is military retired...
As far as I know, there is no such thing as being "lifetime-recallable" at least for enlisted-men. I had a 4 year active four year IIR obligation and good luck to them trying to say I had to come back after I got my honorable dishcharge in 98. Lucky for them I went active reserves in 2003
Wow, guess if you retire from the military they own you
DragonflyX, Let us know when you get called up...
I think in an emergency, the government could recall you until your dead or on life support (while this isn't in writing, I still wouldn't call it impossible)!
In my case, the USAF isn't recalling any retirees (they told me on the phone--I called the USAF Reserve--they had a program for this in 2001). I was told the Army would take other services retirees as volunteers for the Army Reserves, though. Same rank as retired in.
Every soldier who carries the blue DD Form 2 knows this is always a possibility. I have written two letters to W asking to be recalled, still waiting.....
Thanks for the comments folks. The idea of a reduced vulnerability due to the cold war ending, or the idea of a 'peace at hand' period, seems to be a flawed mindset IMO.
There is a law of nature that says that any void will be filled. When the United States emerged as the sole super-power, there was a void left. It was only a matter of time until 'the anti-US', emerged to fill that void.
This law of nature is so strong, that it seems as if even our allies were driven to move in the direction of filling that void.
At this time we have the U.N., France, Germany, Russia, China, a number of the Arab states and terrorists world-wide moving into quasi allignment against the U.S.
While I do not see our former allies siding up against us militarily, they are going to be all too willing to arm our enemies and seek to profiteer off our military confrontations.
The potential hot-spots that we might face, are something we should not ignore. We should rebuild our forces and leave no doubt in anyone's mind that we're absolutely committed to rock solid defense, and eradicating threats wherever they arise.
In the long run, the additional expense will be dirt cheap insurance IMO.
"After all, there are no WMDs in Iraq."
It seems likely they are expecting some use for him there if that is where he is sent....however, the large stockpiles the US clearly expected to produce upon invading, including weapons deployable in 45 minutes, etc., simply have not turned up in the way expected. To call that anything less that a major political blunder by bush and blair is understatement.
Would appreciate everyone's help and thoughts on this as many of you have more info and experience than I. On one hand, I'm not sure we have enough troops and have wondered why we don't increase the number in each branch of the military (or perhaps the Army & Marines for a ground war). On the other hand, I know we have a lot of troops in countries that we're moving (Germany as an example). Do you think we need to add to the number we currently allot for each branch, move troops from other areas, and/or both?
I remember hearing we needed to be able to fight 2 wars at the same time - - -but can we do that. I also know that there is a "Plan" for our military to be lighter and more streamline & agile (I thought this meant the equipment as much or more than the troops, though I see that they could go hand in hand).
TIA!
Intelligence blunder, maybe. Political blunder, hardly. There's a whole laundry list of people who claimed WMDs existence in Iraq, including Clinton, Gore, Kerry and Edwards.
FOR SOME OF US WHEN WE PUT OUR RIGHT HAND IN THE AIR IT WAS A LIFE TIME OATH.
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.