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

To: 68skylark
Here's the graphic.

The problem doesn't look as bad at the Times would like us to think. The real news was the drop in '02 and '03, and the fact that the attrition is still low in '04, '05 and '06.

3 posted on 04/10/2006 8:24:47 AM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: 68skylark

"The real news was the drop in '02 and '03,"

Where was the Times on that one?


11 posted on 04/10/2006 8:31:17 AM PDT by L98Fiero (I'm worth a million in prizes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: 68skylark

So, in other words, the graph tells us that Bill Clinton's presidency drove a higher percentage of young officers out of the military than the Iraq War has.


18 posted on 04/10/2006 8:41:58 AM PDT by dirtboy (Tagline under contruction. Fines doubled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: 68skylark

I would submit the drop is the Clinton era military blue helmet types who were bailing because they could not advance their careers in a real army vs a PC army.


20 posted on 04/10/2006 8:44:01 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: 68skylark
The problem doesn't look as bad at the Times would like us to think. The real news was the drop in '02 and '03, and the fact that the attrition is still low in '04, '05 and '06.

I'd like to see a second line on that chart that plots economic performance. The spike in loss-rate in 98-00 corresponds almost directly with the peak of the internet boom/tech bubble ... when there was a LOT of incentive for young officers to leave the service for the private sector.

With the economy continuing to grow out of the Clinton Recession, I think it more likely that we're seeing the same effect - good private sector jobs that are more appealing than a career in the service.
27 posted on 04/10/2006 8:57:03 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: 68skylark
The problem doesn't look as bad at the Times would like us to think. The real news was the drop in '02 and '03, and the fact that the attrition is still low in '04, '05 and '06.

Just another of the Slimes near-lies.
33 posted on 04/10/2006 9:13:30 AM PDT by JamesP81 (Ignorance of the 10th Amendment should disqualify a person from holding office or being a teacher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: 68skylark

I'm thinking the roaring economy has just a little something to do with it.


39 posted on 04/10/2006 9:27:47 AM PDT by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: 68skylark
The chart shows that our wartime retention rates are higher than our peacetime retention rates during the nineties.

Guys who normally would have got out, delayed getting out while the fighting was thickest; now that things are leveling out, they are pulling the plug. But still at lower rates than in the nineties.

I've always believed that they should recruit more officers from among the NCOs. A captain who was a sergeant would probably be a different breed of cat, compared to the guy who came from ROTC at State College.
52 posted on 04/10/2006 10:14:41 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

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