Posted on 03/03/2005 10:31:20 AM PST by Righty_McRight
WASHINGTON - In what could be a troubling sign for the military, the active-duty Army missed its February recruiting goal by more than 27%. It was the first time in almost five years that the Army has failed to meet a monthly target.
The Army signed up 5,114 recruits in February, 1,936 fewer than its goal of 7,050. The last time the Army missed a monthly target was in May 2000.
The February shortfall is especially worrisome because it comes as the Army is trying to lure recruits with the largest enlistment bonuses it has ever offered: up to $20,000 to some recruits willing to sign on for four years. The Pentagon (news - web sites) has also been adding thousands of recruiters for the Army and other branches.
Doug Smith, a spokesman for U.S. Army Recruiting Command at Fort Knox in Kentucky, attributed the shortfall in part to competition from the improving economy and parents' fears that their children could be injured or killed in Iraq (news - web sites). As of Wednesday, nearly 1,500 U.S. servicemembers had died in Iraq since the invasion in March 2003.
Smith also said the Army has used up many of its "delayed entry" recruits - people who agree to sign up, but whose enlistment is delayed until later for their convenience or the Army's. Last year, the Army rushed several thousand recruits in the delayed entry program into basic training to meet its 2004 recruiting target. Normally, those recruits would have been available this year to boost recruiting numbers.
"It's just going to be a rough year," Smith said.
The Marine Corps missed its monthly target in January for the first time in nearly 10 years, but it met its February goal.
David Segal, a military sociologist at the University of Maryland who monitors personnel trends, said the Army's February numbers reflect the extraordinary demands on the nation's ground forces and the uneasiness many Americans feel about the war in Iraq.
"We all knew this was coming if you looked at what is happening in the Army Guard and Army Reserve," Segal said, pointing to recruiting problems in those two part-time military forces. "The question was not whether it would happen to the Army, but when."
The active-duty Army needs to recruit 80,000 new soldiers this year - 3,000 more than last year - to replenish its ranks. Segal said he does not think the Army will achieve that goal.
Guard and reserve recruiting has lagged. Through January, four months into a recruiting year that runs from October 2004 through September 2005, the Army Guard was almost 24% behind its recruiting target. Figures were unavailable for February. The Army Reserve was about 10% below its recruiting target through February.
The Army National Guard and the Army Reserve are part-time forces made up of soldiers who train typically one weekend a month and two weeks in the summer in peacetime. That has changed dramatically, however. Guard and reserve troops now make up about 40% of the full-time U.S. troops in Iraq.
February's results are the first sign that recruiting problems plaguing the Guard and reserve are spreading to the active force.
Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., said several Army generals told him last year that recruiting was likely to "fall off a cliff" in 2005. "I think this spells a major recruiting shortfall for the Army," he said.
Lower the age restriction....you would have more than enough "old farts" to make up for it.
This will be a lib talking point for the next year. It is sad that they have to be so jubilant about anything that looks bad for the US.
Conscripts...
18-65
This will give libs something to cheer about. From my perspective, I think this is a temporary problem -- there are a number of ways to deal with it. So while I hate to take away some good cheer from our friends on the left, I really don't think it's a big deal.
This should please them immensely.
I agree.
The stop-loss orders have hurt. A lot of young people want to serve - but no one wants to make an open-ended committment.
USA Today could have noted a flip side to this news -- for young people with patriotism and spirit, there's never been a better time to join up. They can get some good bonuses, good job choices, and some great promotion opportunities right now.
The Navy and Air Force were supposed to give up 40,000 billets to the Marines and Army. Has this taken affect and spiked recruiting goals higher?
The CIA Factbook reports that over 2.1 million Americans reach 18 ("military age") annually.
The idea that less than 4% of them will become soldiers is distressing.
I agree with that. And the political aspect of this is so sensitive that there are something like 5,500 AWOL cases in the U.S. military that aren't even being pursued.
Conscripts.. Absolutely not. If we can't get enough volunteers to fill the ranks of the military then we deserve to go the way of the French...
The French have recruiting problems?
If you need bodies, and they are not volunteering...what do you do?
Isn't military retirement after 20 years? Seems like they could at least bump it up to 45. They go up to age 65, I know a lot of able-bodied vets that would re-up for Iraq/Afghanistan/WOT.
It would be easy to raise the recruiting numbers by relaxing those standards a little.
From a military point of view, I don't know that it's a great idea -- for the War on Terrorism, I'd rather have few people of the highest possible caliber.
Might be time for us Freepers to do what we can. Let's make it a point to talk to any high school seniors or college students that we know and see if we can get them to at least consider meeting with a recruiter.
The minimum about of service for retirement is 20 years. But the military allows (and desires) a lot of people to serve past that point, especially SF soldiers.
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.