On 2005-06-02 14:07, AdmBito wrote:
From what I understand, they take about a third of your bonus as taxes. Also, I think the tanks are the safe places, while the Humvees and thin skinned trucks are not. The problem lies in having no armor, where tanks have that in abundance. Standing outside of an artillery piece doesn't offer much protection from mortars or roving bands of dudes trying to blow themselves up from salvation.

Good luck!

On 2005-06-02 14:17, Tael wrote:
Its not just the conflicts in Afganistan and Iraq, but what they are doing to people that are in the service. At the beginning of the conflicts recruitment was still strong, no shortages... But some brainiac at the Pentagon got the brilliant idea that Unit Cohesiveness was the most important factor to an Combat Efficiency. Granted keeping units together keeps the experiance level up, but not allowing people to leave the service once their time is up lowers moral. Continually extending units deploy times on a whim while cutting short their stateside time reduces their moral. One thing the Military has known for years is that Moral is what makes or breaks an army. Thats why the mail run has a higher priority than food or bullets... Keep moral high and you get more from your men. Part of Intels job is to find ways to demoralize the enemy...

So because of some idiot in the Pentagon, the military has departed from the aged and proven belief of Troop Moral being important.

Thus, while they were getting new blood, many of them were kept stateside while vets who had done their time in the sand were being forced to stay there longer and do more.

The Vets went public and several tried to get the courts to override the Military on these decissions and allow them to come home. The courts sided with the military.

But the damage was done... People saw the dissent in the forces. The issues of the armored humvees and body armor is more of the news media fluff piece than anything significant. I've been in conflict zones all over the world. Any never did we worry about armoring the Humvees, we either got out of them or tried to speed up to get out of the area... As for the body armor, often even when provided the option to use the body armor, we turned it down because of the bulk and weight. The way it covers your body can lead you to over heat, especially for the infantry who are walking on the ground with all their gear on their back... Grunts try to find ways to shed weight, not add it.

The Military instituted the Stop Loss to keep unit Cohession and forced many more people to stay past their end of service. Note, all military contracts are for 8 years. Weither you do 3 active or 4 active, there is still an 8 year contract. So the difference is your "Inactive" reserve time. You can be called back to duty at any time during that.

Usually its only used when the need for troops doesnt meet with the number of recruits. But in this case they started pulling back in people with combat experiance or special skills instead of sending in the fresh recruits. This caused more dissention in the military ranks.

Many Guard units where were ment only to be used sparingly in times of war abroad and more for homeland defense are acting more like active duty military units than being the auxillary defense force they were ment to be. This has further angered many in the National Guard and again caused more outcry from the military to the public.

Now many people leaving active duty that would normally switch to the National Guard are refusing to join. The National Guard "expects" to absorb about 20% of those discharging from active duty to their ranks. Thats no longer happening and their numbers are now dwindling as a result. The National Guard has now started resorting to legal action against people trying to quit. (After your initial contract, you are suppose to be able to resign from the National Guard at any time as you would any job.) Just a few months ago the National Guard got a court to agree with them to force 2 pilots to return to Iraq and pressed them back into the Guard after they tried to legally quit citing the need for their specialty skills.

Things have gotten so bad that a new law went into effect this year that few know about. It use to be if you were on disability from the military, such as I am, you were no longer subject to possible recall. The Government slashed V.A. (Veterans Affairs) budget and their benifits, but also raised their ammount of pay those currently on disablilty got by an additional 5% (wooping $30/month more for me). The catch-22 on this is, now any former military personel drawing disability is subject to full recall for as long as you draw disability. I know two guys now, one was out for 14 years, the other just over 8 years and both of them were pressed back into service because of their skills, and I have heard of others...

Another thing that has plauged recruitment for some time now is the "Happy Days" issue. Something that came up in the 90's just after Tail-hook and all the hazing issues came up. The Military wants the "Fonzerelly" types, but the rules placed on them by Congress limits them to only recruiting the "Richie Cunninghams"... Thus a measure ment to improve the personality character of those serving in the service has further limited the pool of "acceptable" recuits further...