10000 ex Soldiers recalled to active service because of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-16-2004, 04:31 PM   #16
War Child
 
BluberryPoptart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 532
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Oh, and there was that editorial in my newspaper, which does not have a link for anything past the first day. If I can find the old article I'll type it up.

But I don't know why you are all so stuck on source verification, if it comes from the 'wrong' source, or someone from the 'wrong side' you will not give it credibility anyway, even if it is in print. Why bother? Everyone here is so set in their ways they're only going to believe what they want to anyway.
__________________

__________________
BluberryPoptart is offline  
Old 07-16-2004, 04:50 PM   #17
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BluberryPoptart
But I don't know why you are all so stuck on source verification, if it comes from the 'wrong' source, or someone from the 'wrong side' you will not give it credibility anyway, even if it is in print. Why bother? Everyone here is so set in their ways they're only going to believe what they want to anyway.
On an internet forum people are free to say almost whatever they like. Asking them to back up their statements with sources is the only way to ensure that people aren't just flat out lying. And unfortunately not all sources are equally credible - a quality newspaper such as the Guardian, Telegraph or Independent has far more credibility than a tabloid publication like the Sun or Star.
__________________

__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 07-17-2004, 08:10 PM   #18
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:17 PM
1st of all......Reservists are not the worst soldiers of the lot. I served with many very competant and dedicated people. I am not certain if that was what was meant by a post in here, but, reservists are VERY well trained as long as they are foinf the mission they are trained to do.

2ndly....it is sad that reservists and former active army are being recalled from the IRR. For those who do not know what the Inactive Ready Reserve is.....it is a pool that you are put into when you complete your contract with the service for two years. While you are discharged from having to actively participate in army activities, you are NOT free from activation until the two year period is up. This is in your CONTRACT. No soldier should be surprised during the time we are in now to find that the governement is calling them back to duty.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FIZZ-the administration has taken steps to fill in draft board positions around our country. According to what I have read, it is a NORMAL thing to do and does not mean there will be a draft, however, the steps have led people to believe that there will be a draft. I have no sources to link you to right now, but this is based on things I remember reading throughout the past year.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, surprise surprise, I disagree that there should not be a draft.

At the beginning of the war when I thought the administration would be successful in building a coalition that contained more man support, I was against the draft.

I AM currently in favor of activating and retraining reservists to fill in positions in which we need to provide relief to the soldiers who have not been home in ages.

I am in favor of the draft because it is so easy to say that we have a volunteer military and not bat an eye over the issue of Iraq. One thing that will make people think on both sides of the issue of Iraq and the use of our military is to reinstate the draft. It will make people thing, and it will kill the apathy on this issue right now, I feel it is not having an impact on people the way a draft would. I say this after spending a week with family that have not taken the time to educate themselves on the issues.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-17-2004, 10:33 PM   #19
War Child
 
Seabird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: with 2 kids in high school they tell her that she's uncool, but she's still preoccupied with 1985
Posts: 906
Local Time: 06:17 PM
My son and his friends are still terrified and convinced it's coming very soon. They are planning to move to Dublin
__________________
Seabird is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 02:02 AM   #20
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:17 PM
There are a number of reasons that the Draft should not be brought back as shown by the success of the all volunteer military. It is also not needed given the large numbers of reservist that have yet to be called and the size of the US military. It would be far better, if more troops are needed, to simply expand the size of the all volunteer military back to Cold War levels if need be. Why use a draft when you can have volunteers?

In addition, many who support bringing back the draft in Congress do so because they believe the USA would be less likely to go to war if we had a draft. History shows otherwise with the USA becoming involved with more large scale wars when the draft was in place then after it.

The all volunteer military is now about half the size it was during the 1980s. If more troops are needed, simply expand the size of the all volunteer military.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 02:19 AM   #21
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,700
Local Time: 05:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
There are a number of reasons that the Draft should not be brought back as shown by the success of the all volunteer military. It is also not needed given the large numbers of reservist that have yet to be called and the size of the US military. It would be far better, if more troops are needed, to simply expand the size of the all volunteer military back to Cold War levels if need be. Why use a draft when you can have volunteers?

In addition, many who support bringing back the draft in Congress do so because they believe the USA would be less likely to go to war if we had a draft. History shows otherwise with the USA becoming involved with more large scale wars when the draft was in place then after it.

The all volunteer military is now about half the size it was during the 1980s. If more troops are needed, simply expand the size of the all volunteer military.
We shouldn't be re-enlisting reservists, it should have never gotten to that point! Yes it would be far better if we had an all volunteer army, but unfortunately those numbers are getting dangersously close to not matching what we need...and if Bush stays in office and decides to further his "war on terror" then we're screwed.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-18-2004, 08:20 AM   #22
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:17 PM
I am sure there is a direct statistical coalition between the draft and war. I am not sure there is a statistical coalition that shows the DRAFT caused the US top become involved in a war.

I believe people are more willing to watch a volunteer army go to war than a drafted army.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 04:50 PM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


We shouldn't be re-enlisting reservists, it should have never gotten to that point! Yes it would be far better if we had an all volunteer army, but unfortunately those numbers are getting dangersously close to not matching what we need...and if Bush stays in office and decides to further his "war on terror" then we're screwed.
The US Army National Guard has a total of 8 divisions with another unattached 18 Brigades. Thats a total of 42 Brigades vs. the 33 Brigades that the Active Army has. While many reserve units have been sent overseas, the majority have yet to go anywhere yet. I feel that the military needs to be using more of these Reserve Units to help take the burden off the Active Duty Force.

The US Military has been structured for decades to heavily use the reserves. Its actually impossible for the Active Army to go to war without mobilizing key support units only found in the Reserves. In addition, planning has always anticipated the use of Reserve Combat Units if the situation required it. During the Berlin Crises in the early 1960s, JFK put ALL the reserves on active duty for a full 2 years. I'll have to check back with the numbers, but currently only about 30% of the reserves are on active duty.

Also, if Kerry is elected instead of Bush, what do you think he will actually do differently from Bush?
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 04:57 PM   #24
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
I am sure there is a direct statistical coalition between the draft and war. I am not sure there is a statistical coalition that shows the DRAFT caused the US top become involved in a war.

I believe people are more willing to watch a volunteer army go to war than a drafted army.
I understand your thinking on this and agree with it to a certain degree. But history shows that when the draft was used, the country became involved more frequently, in some of the longest and most costly wars.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 06:46 PM   #25
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,700
Local Time: 05:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


Also, if Kerry is elected instead of Bush, what do you think he will actually do differently from Bush?
I'm not sure what this has to do with it. We're where we're at due to the actions of this administration. I think Kerry would have at least tried harder to establish a true coalition so that our troops wouldn't be stretched this thin. I also think he would have planned the occupation a lot better. This was a poorly planned war and the situation we're in with our troops is a direct result of that.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-19-2004, 12:31 AM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


I'm not sure what this has to do with it. We're where we're at due to the actions of this administration. I think Kerry would have at least tried harder to establish a true coalition so that our troops wouldn't be stretched this thin. I also think he would have planned the occupation a lot better. This was a poorly planned war and the situation we're in with our troops is a direct result of that.
What is your definition of a "True" Coalition? Do you have an historical example to compare it to? Is there any record of Kerry going public before the March 2003 invasion saying "the President had failed to build a true coalition and that he had no plan for the occupation"?
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-19-2004, 06:21 AM   #27
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Sting, I think that a true coalition is the one where you have those strong and important countries willing to fight alongside you such as France and Saudi Arabia true beacons and strong leadership and respect for the rights of man.

Oddly enough it was the 1991 coalition that prevented George Bush from invading Iraq and the result of this coalition forced US troops to remain in Saudi Arabia which in turn started Bin Laden on a more violent campaign against American interests abroad and extended the Islamist cause globally. If thats the multinational coalition that Kerry wants to build then forget him, the USA must never give up control of its millitary and strategic interests to a bunch of duplicitous middle powers who actively collaborate with the enemy. If it does then Iraq will be destined to fail, I personally would rather see a Pax Americana than another UN disaster.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-19-2004, 07:08 AM   #28
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:17 PM
The administration is not REENLISTING anyone. Soldiers are placed(depending on their contract) into the inactive ready reserve for up to two years for this purpose. It is part of their contract that they signed. No one is getting screwed.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-19-2004, 01:18 PM   #29
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,700
Local Time: 05:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
The administration is not REENLISTING anyone. Soldiers are placed(depending on their contract) into the inactive ready reserve for up to two years for this purpose. It is part of their contract that they signed. No one is getting screwed.
There are people who have served their contracts and are being asked to sign another. Reenlisting or whatever you want to call it, but I know it's happening. My father worked as a civilian on an airforce base in TX and a lot of our family friends are retired service or reservist people and I know of at least one who reenlisted because he was asked to.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-19-2004, 05:00 PM   #30
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:17 PM
There is a difference between REENLISTING and activation from the INDIVIDUAL READY RESERVES. No one can be forced to REENLIST unless they want to.

The original post of this thread was about recalling people in the Ready Reserves.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com