Army Stops Many Soldiers From Quitting

Army Stops Many Soldiers From Quitting
Orders Extend Enlistments to Curtail Troop Shortages

By Lee Hockstader
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 29, 2003; Page A01

Chief Warrant Officer Ronald Eagle, an expert on enemy targeting, served 20 years in the military -- 10 years of active duty in the Air Force, another 10 in the West Virginia National Guard. Then he decided enough was enough. He owned a promising new aircraft-maintenance business, and it needed his attention. His retirement date was set for last February.


Staff Sgt. Justin Fontaine, a generator mechanic, enrolled in the Massachusetts National Guard out of high school and served nearly nine years. In preparation for his exit date last March, he turned in his field gear -- his rucksack and web belt, his uniforms and canteen.

Staff Sgt. Peter G. Costas, an interrogator in an intelligence unit, joined the Army Reserve in 1991, extended his enlistment in 1999 and then re-upped for three years in 2000. Costas, a U.S. Border Patrol officer in Texas, was due to retire from the reserves in last May.

According to their contracts, expectations and desires, all three soldiers should have been civilians by now. But Fontaine and Costas are currently serving in Iraq, and Eagle has just been deployed. On their Army paychecks, the expiration date of their military service is now listed sometime after 2030 -- the payroll computer's way of saying, "Who knows?"
rest at.
www.washingtonpost.com...

Still think you�re not going to be called to serve in Bushs war machine in 2005? Think again!! He won�t let our soldiers leave and more and more want to. They realize this administration is corrupt to the bone and wants them to fight unjust wars. This next election is the most important in American history vote wisely.

I know that you probably don't understand the way of the military, but there are no definates. The Army chooses which job you have, where you serve, and in what capacity. It's all due to the needs of the service.

That also goes with termination. When a person signes a "4 year contract", you are really signing an 8 year contract.

The 4 year comes as an active duty or reserve duty time. The following 4 years are an "inactive" status in case there is a major conflict and they are needed. After all 8 years, they are free and clear.

This is why they are contractually obligated to serve althuoght the initial phase of their contract has been completed.

There is nothing the Bush administration has done here, it is the way the military has worked for some decades now. Everyone in knows.

There are different rules for officers. They can resign when they wish, but it is based on approval of their superiors, and they get a 10 year inactive status, since there are less of them, and they are trained further.

Anyway, stop with the Bush #, it has nothing to do with that.

There is nothing the Bush administration has done here, it is the way the military has worked for some decades now. Everyone in knows.

Yep... What many forget, is that there is not a democracy in the military. In exchange for the benefits that come with service, you are giving up many rights as well. It is a conscious decision that they all made at the time. While Bush can't be blamed for this....I do think that in order to be denied retirement, and reactivated, or extend the activation, it should only be done during a Congressional-approved and declared war....not a police action....but that's just my 2 cents....

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Anyway, stop with the Bush #, it has nothing to do with that.

Really who invaded Iraq for Weapons of Mass Destruction? It�s all Bushs fault.

Agreed about the BS war, BUT I was referring to the point about keeping soldiers in the service.

THAT is not Bushes fault, it's the way things work.

Anyway. I don't like the war either, just add another thing for terrorists to use against us.

Boy, for a war on terror, we sure are giving them a hell of a lot of ammo

So lets say I do 2 terms in the army or whatever you call it. They can still call me back for 4 years after service or is it just if you do one term?

[Edited on 29-12-2003 by DiRtYDeViL]

Once you sign a contract they can keep you in the military as long as they want legally.

Originally posted by Shoktek
Once you sign a contract they can keep you in the military as long as they want legally.

Holy #!! That's scary glad I never signed up and am to old to serve.

What's the deal with drug testing? That and the differences between today's army and what I knew say 10 or 15 years ago?

I used to party with some of the most messed up, insane people on the planet, and they were all Ft. Bragg enlisted.

Jar heads that would beat people in the street for no reason, really bad drug addicts, criminals, etc. and they would drive to Raleigh (about 100 miles from base) just to do this stuff.

None were kicked out to my knowledge, but three I know of died 'in training'. This was peace time, so it may be different know...but these guys couldn't bag groceries from what I could tell. I mean they were certifiable. Do you change THAT MUCH back on base and follow orders? I just can't imagine.

Also why aren't training accidents on the news if it happens that often? A guy's Mom I knew was just told one day her son was never a Navy Seal, and he's been missing since. Also, are there any credible sources for enlisted and reserve 'sucicides'? I heard a General slip a rather high figure on Fox one day, then couldn't find any sources at all on this?

Apparently there have been quite a few suicides by reservists not wanting to go to Iraq. Anyway... thoughts?

Since you're pretty much signing your rights away, in the military, you're also heavily drugged with things not even fully tested yet. I've known more than my share of psychopathic ex-soldiers (especially Marines, they seem to get the bulk of the psycho drugs), so such suicides and training accidents don't surprise me a bit.... What many fail to realize, is that when you go into the military, you are no longer in a democracy...you are in a totalitarian system.

And yes, as long as there is active combat, they can keep you in the military as long as they want, regardless of what term you signed up for. My point is that this should only be circumvented if a war is declared by congress. Only then should you be able to activate those who've served their terms....not for police actions by the commander in chief.

Originally posted by Gazrok
My point is that this should only be circumvented if a war is declared by congress. Only then should you be able to activate those who've served their terms....not for police actions by the commander in chief.

BOOOOOYAAAAH! Now that's some fine insight ya done did there, O Ming the Merciless!

Seriously though, for the non-believers, just do an ATS search on the murders at Ft.Bragg & the ones out West to see the Chem-mood cocktails our soldiers are on.
Hell, they already announced a Super Soldier program - what makes anyone think they aren't doping now?

Originally posted by DiRtYDeViL

So lets say I do 2 terms in the army or whatever you call it. They can still call me back for 4 years after service or is it just if you do one term?

[Edited on 29-12-2003 by DiRtYDeViL]

If you finish your time and get a discharge to civilian status, they can't call you back, but they can put a stop on your leaving if they want to.

I was in the Marine Corps, in the infantry, and I never had any incounter with drugs given to me by the Coprs.

I also had drug testing randomly the whole time.

Some marines are just stupid enough to belay their own self for that of the Marine Corps.

They really buy into the training so hard that there is almost no way of convincing them that they are people too.

I was in the Marine Corps, in the infantry, and I never had any incounter with drugs given to me by the Coprs.

Really? You never had shots, never ate Marine chow, never got "vaccinated", never got injected with antidotes for chem attacks, atropine, etc.??? Wow, that's gotta be some kind of record.... I think you see where I'm going with this.....

There's definitely some messed up stuff going on still.

But all I see on Ads and news stories are these perfect patriot family men and women in military careers.

I guess I'm asking if the 'skinheads' are weeded out now. Once you've seen someone curb a stranger for being black or looking like a hippie, it kind of makes you anti-military. I would think those guys should be in an insane asylum, not government employees.

And sending people like that to police and 'liberate' foreigners? Woah.

Originally posted by DiRtYDeViL

Still think you�re not going to be called to serve in Bushs war machine in 2005? Think again!! He won�t let our soldiers leave and more and more want to. They realize this administration is corrupt to the bone and wants them to fight unjust wars. This next election is the most important in American history vote wisely.

This is nothing new. It's still awful, though. A friend of mine's ETS date came up during Operation Desert Shield. He was sitting on the airplane getting ready to fly for home and his departure from service when they pulled him off the bird and informed him they were extending his time for the duration of the war. He took it like a man and did his time, unfair as it was. I had a lot of respect for him because of that.

This whole thing just goes to show how piss-poor the planning was for this whole Iraqi mis-adventure. If Rumsfeld had listened to his military commanders, things wouldn't have escalated to this sorry state.

Back in the early 90's I said the drawdown (the way they were going at it) was STOOOPID. Sho 'nuff. If we still had the strength in numbers that we had at the end of the Gulf war, things would be a lot different.

All of this stupidity is causing many, many in uniform to get out and never look back. I give Rumsfeld the IDIOT OF THE YEAR award for doing everything in his power to destroy our military from the ground up. (And I'm not blaming him for the drawdown. That's on Bush I and Klinton. Two peas in a pod.)

Originally posted by DiRtYDeViL

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Anyway, stop with the Bush #, it has nothing to do with that.

Really who invaded Iraq for Weapons of Mass Destruction? It�s all Bushs fault.

This whole thing is about oil and to line the pockets of allready rich CEO's and politicians even more so. They bombed every communications device in iraq, more than was needed for a militaristic purpose, and now worldcom has a contract to rebuild all of iraqs telecommunications.
worldcom lands Iraq contract

Same thing in afghanistan, they are now building a natural gas pipeline from afghanistan to pakistan all the way to New Dehli in india and you can bet an american corporation is making money on it.

Originally posted by DiRtYDeViL

Army Stops Many Soldiers From Quitting
Orders Extend Enlistments to Curtail Troop Shortages

By Lee Hockstader
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 29, 2003; Page A01

Chief Warrant Officer Ronald Eagle, an expert on enemy targeting, served 20 years in the military -- 10 years of active duty in the Air Force, another 10 in the West Virginia National Guard. Then he decided enough was enough. He owned a promising new aircraft-maintenance business, and it needed his attention. His retirement date was set for last February.


Staff Sgt. Justin Fontaine, a generator mechanic, enrolled in the Massachusetts National Guard out of high school and served nearly nine years. In preparation for his exit date last March, he turned in his field gear -- his rucksack and web belt, his uniforms and canteen.

Staff Sgt. Peter G. Costas, an interrogator in an intelligence unit, joined the Army Reserve in 1991, extended his enlistment in 1999 and then re-upped for three years in 2000. Costas, a U.S. Border Patrol officer in Texas, was due to retire from the reserves in last May.

According to their contracts, expectations and desires, all three soldiers should have been civilians by now. But Fontaine and Costas are currently serving in Iraq, and Eagle has just been deployed. On their Army paychecks, the expiration date of their military service is now listed sometime after 2030 -- the payroll computer's way of saying, "Who knows?"
rest at.
www.washingtonpost.com...

Still think you�re not going to be called to serve in Bushs war machine in 2005? Think again!! He won�t let our soldiers leave and more and more want to. They realize this administration is corrupt to the bone and wants them to fight unjust wars. This next election is the most important in American history vote wisely.

er-- im a lil confused....
whats this "war machine" thing? ( I know its not like an actual machine, but ) is he planning some massive assault???

and what right do they have to keep their soldiers in active duty???

America is messed up.. no offense to yall amercans.. I think my homeland of canada has warped a bit ......

The proper name for this is called "Stop Loss." It does not always affect everyone in the military. Usually those with specialty jobs "mos". Also it affects people like those in Iraq that really have no one else to replace them.

If you look at an army enlistment contract you in really are sighing your life away. It basically says this. Once you are in the military they can change your job, duty station and keep you in the military as long as needed. Especially in times of war. This happens frequetly in korea. Thousands were affected with a 3 month involutarily extension. Many people with orders to leave couldn't. A tour here is 12 months they served 15.

Right. Stop Loss is a common practice. It has nothing to do with Bush.

Everyone who signs a contract, whether it's for 3, 4, or 6 years has it in thier contract that they are obligated for 8. The rest of the term is spent on IRR (Individual Ready Reserve), during which time you can be called back to active service. After 8 years, your obligation is met, and they can't touch you.

DeltaChaos