Army to Call Up Retired, Discharged Troops

[MrRant 0]

WASHINGTON - The Army is preparing to notify about 5,600 retired and discharged soldiers who are not members of the National Guard or Reserve that they will be involuntarily recalled to active duty for possible service in Iraq (news - web sites) or Afghanistan (news - web sites), Army officials said Tuesday.

 

It marks the first time the Army has called on the Individual Ready Reserve, as this category of reservists is known, in substantial numbers since the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites). Several hundred of them have volunteered for active-duty service since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

 

Those who are part of the involuntary call up are likely to be assigned to National Guard or Reserve units that have been mobilized for duty in Iraq or Afghanistan, according to Army officials who discussed some details Tuesday on condition they not be identified because a public announcement was planned for Wednesday.

 

Members of Congress were being notified of the decision Tuesday, the officials said.

 

Unlike members of the National Guard and Reserve, the individual reservists do not perform regularly scheduled training. Any former enlisted soldier who did not serve at least eight years on active duty is in the Individual Ready Reserve pool, as are all officers who have not resigned their commission.

 

The Army has been reviewing its list of 118,000 eligible individual reservists for several weeks in search of qualified people in certain high-priority skill areas like civil affairs.

 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._reserve_callup

[Guest INXS]

Well, that's why they are reservists and what they are there for.

 

That's a possible 118,000 people NOT voting for Bush in November tho..

[Jobber of the Week 0]

they will be involuntarily recalled to active duty for possible service in Iraq

 

Wow, this will really boost recruitment numbers among the volunteers.

[1234-5678 0]

Once these guys start dying, it's back to the draft baby!

[Guest MikeSC]

Once these guys start dying, it's back to the draft baby!

Sure --- provided one ignores that nobody is even seriously considering the possibility of the draft.

-=Mike

[Guest INXS]

I think it's been considered..has to have been.

[Guest MikeSC]

I think it's been considered..has to have been.

No, it seriously has not been. Nobody is even going to seriously propose the bill.

-=Mike

[1234-5678 0]

Once these guys start dying, it's back to the draft baby!

Sure --- provided one ignores that nobody is even seriously considering the possibility of the draft.

-=Mike

"Around Marotti, many other juniors in Handy's classroom are aware that two bills in Congress aim to reinstate the military draft could conscribe them to a two-year tour of duty. And unlike the draft during the Vietnam era, as one of the bills is presently worded, the Universal National Service Act would contain no exemption for college students."

 

Link

 

Hasn't even been considered huh? Two bills in Congress is not being considered? So what is "being considered" then?

[Guest MikeSC]

Once these guys start dying, it's back to the draft baby!

Sure --- provided one ignores that nobody is even seriously considering the possibility of the draft.

-=Mike

"Around Marotti, many other juniors in Handy's classroom are aware that two bills in Congress aim to reinstate the military draft could conscribe them to a two-year tour of duty. And unlike the draft during the Vietnam era, as one of the bills is presently worded, the Universal National Service Act would contain no exemption for college students."

 

Link

 

Hasn't even been considered huh? Two bills in Congress is not being considered? So what is "being considered" then?

And the bill will die in committee, along with OTHER idiotic bills with no chance of passage, such as Hatch's bill to bar the selling of DVD-R's.

-=Mike

...Funny you ignored the one problem in your theory, and that the story clearly stated: BOTH sides --- pro- and anti-war --- oppose the draft.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Yeah, but you said NOBODY was seriously considering a draft.

[Guest INXS]

Ah, so it HAS been considered...it would be kinda amusing if you were drafted Mike...

[Guest MikeSC]

Ah, so it HAS been considered...it would be kinda amusing if you were drafted Mike...

No, it has not been seriously considered. Do you have ANY idea the sheer volume of bills that get ignored in Congress when proposed? Hell, I'd be willing to bet reparations bills have been proposed for slavery. Doesn't mean they've been seriously considered.

 

I'd go if drafted.

-=Mike

[1234-5678 0]

"H.R. 163 and S. 89 were both introduced by Democrats Charles Rangel (NY) and Ernest Hollings (SC) respectively. The bills were introduced in January 2003 and would require both men and women to either perform mandatory military or civilian service. Both of these pieces of legislation are currently stalled and there's no indication that they are going anywhere anytime soon. But, just when you thought the draft debate ended here comes Republican Senator Chuck Hagel (NE).

 

Appearing on NBC's Today Show on April 21, 2004, Hagel said that mandatory military service must be considered in the face of what he described as a generational war against terrorism , with a grim forecast of the US being engaged in war for the next 25 years! Echoing prior statements by Selective Service representatives and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, presidential spokesman Scott McClellan replied to Hagel's comments by saying that reinstatement of the draft is not something that's under consideration at this time.

 

Which leads us to ask if not now, when?"

 

Link

 

 

Rumsfeld and McClellan are just toeing the company line, but from Hagel's comments, it is only a matter of time.

[Guest MikeSC]

"H.R. 163 and S. 89 were both introduced by Democrats Charles Rangel (NY) and Ernest Hollings (SC) respectively. The bills were introduced in January 2003 and would require both men and women to either perform mandatory military or civilian service. Both of these pieces of legislation are currently stalled and there's no indication that they are going anywhere anytime soon. But, just when you thought the draft debate ended here comes Republican Senator Chuck Hagel (NE).

 

Appearing on NBC's Today Show on April 21, 2004, Hagel said that mandatory military service must be considered in the face of what he described as a generational war against terrorism , with a grim forecast of the US being engaged in war for the next 25 years! Echoing prior statements by Selective Service representatives and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, presidential spokesman Scott McClellan replied to Hagel's comments by saying that reinstatement of the draft is not something that's under consideration at this time.

 

Which leads us to ask if not now, when?"

 

Link

 

 

Rumsfeld and McClellan are just toeing the company line, but from Hagel's comments, it is only a matter of time.

Do you know WHY Rangel and Hollings put the bill up?

 

To scare people into thinking a draft is coming.

 

Rangel has done it more than once.

-=Mike

[Guest Cerebus]

The title of this thread is 100% wrong. All members of the military are required to serve 8 years in some capacity, including IRR, UNLESS THEY ARE DISCHARGED. I know because I was medically discharged from the Navy, had to resign my comission, and was unable to become part of the Navy IRR. (Source here in case you don't believe me). Retired soldiers from the Army are sent to the Retired Reserve which the Army is NOT drawing from.

 

I would ask a mod change the title of this thread because it is not happening nor is it even what the article says is happening.

[MrRant 0]

They are retired and/or discharged moron.

[Vyce 0]

Mike is 100% right - nothing will become of these bills.

 

To try and somehow present the argument that because these bills have been introduced into Congress, that they're being "seriously considered" (which is what Jaxl seems to be trying to say), is laughable. Thousands of bills get introduced every year - TENS of thousands - and only a few hundred will pass. The rest generally die in committee, or if they're lucky, they die on the floor. These bills will very likely fall into the former.

 

And I believe that Mike's analysis of the reasoning behind these bills is sound - they've been written to sort of scare everyone into thinking the draft is coming back. Or, in Rangel's case, he wants to ensure that more white kids get drafted rather than minorities.

 

I remember glancing over the bills before, and I think that the focus on military service is somewhat overstated. If I remember correctly, the bills would require mandatory civil service, but they wouldn't necessarily require mandatory *military* service.

 

I'd go if drafted.

 

As would I.

[Precious Roy 0]

Personally, I don't have a problem with mandatory civil service, but mandatory military service is an entirely different issue.

[Guest MikeSC]

Personally, I don't have a problem with mandatory civil service, but mandatory military service is an entirely different issue.

If you don't mind me asking --- why is one OK and one not?

-=Mike

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

For one, a military draft tends to put people in harm's way.

[Vyce 0]

They are retired and/or discharged moron.

The article specifically states that these men must complete 8 years of service.

 

Any former enlisted soldier who did not serve at least eight years on active duty is in the Individual Ready Reserve pool, as are all officers who have not resigned their commission.

 

I'm not well versed in military law, but I would imagine that unless these men have completed their 8 years or resigned their commission, the fact that they've retired or been discharged is irrelevant.

 

In Cer's case, he was discharged AND resigned his commission - it appears that members of this reserve pool may have been discharged, but they retained their commission, thus making them eligible for recall.

[Guest MikeSC]

They are retired and/or discharged moron.

Quite frankly, I'll trust Cerebus' knowledge of military procedure over a reporter's.

-=Mike

[MrRant 0]

You are all motherfucking dolts. They are eligible to be called up under IRR but if you read CLEARLY they are DISCHARGED from the military.

[Guest MikeSC]

You are all motherfucking dolts. They are eligible to be called up under IRR but if you read CLEARLY they are DISCHARGED from the military.

And Cerebus' is arguing that the reporter doesn't know what the hell he's talking about --- which isn't unlikely. Again, I'll trust somebody who's gone through the system over a reporter who has never been involved.

-=Mike

[Guest Cerebus]

They are retired and/or discharged moron.

You. Are. Wrong.

 

All members of the military MUST complete eight years of service in some sort of capacity. This is called Military Service Obligation (MSO). After your contract is up you must make up the rest of the years if you have not done so already. This can be done by joining the IRR (not the only way but one). If you are discharged from the military, you do NOT have to finish off the MSO except for a few specific cases (joining another part of the military or joining an officer training program). My source, in case you missed it the first time, which apparently you did, is DoD Directive 1304.25.

 

3.4.  Military Service Obligation (MSO).    The total required service that each person who becomes a member of a Military Service shall serve in a Military Service discharged under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Military Department concerned.

 

6.2.1.  The MSO is considered terminated when a Service member is discharged, except as indicated in paragraph 6.2.2., below.

 

In addition, like I said before, all retired personell are not part of the IRR they are part of the Retired Reserve which are not being drawn upon.

 

Edit: The article that Rant originally posted had an error. Here is a revised one.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Actually, I agree with Cerebus, but the last part of his post kinda made me giggle.

 

Still don't belive me? Search for "retire" and "discharge" IN YOUR OWN FUCKING ARTICLE. It's not there. Why? Because they are not being drawn upon. Period.

 

The Army is preparing to notify about 5,600 retired and discharged soldiers who are not members of the National Guard or Reserve

 

Technicality? Of course. But you exaggerated a bit

 

 

 

EDIT: Fucker. Beat me to it by a matter of seconds.

[TSA09 0]

This isn't the first time. My neighbor has been retired for years and he is almost 80 and he is still called by Washington. He goes everytime they call and he'll tell you he has no problem with it. He'll leave in the dead of night and not return for months and his family has no idea where he is.

[Styles 0]

For a really excellent analysis from About.com of all places that details why the return of the draft is not a possibility, read this article: http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/wars/a/draft.htm

[Guest Cerebus]

To further clarify:

 

The original article that Rant posted was very very wrong. In fact it was a major fuckup that even a cursory research into the IRR and the MSO would clear up. Now if you click on the article it says, more accurately, "Army Recalling Thousands Who Left Service" and changed "retired and discharged soldiers who are not members of the National Guard or Reserve" to "people who recently left the service and still have a reserve obligation."

 

Rant:

 

No offense was meant to you buddy, but you really shouldn't take the AP as gospel. They can, and do, fuck up their breaking wire reports.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

I was just making fun of you. You don't have to bring fact into this.