posted on April 23, 2004 10:33:33 PM new
U.S. Soldiers Re-Enlist in Strong Numbers
Fri Apr 23, 2:24 PM ET
By KIMBERLY HEFLING, Associated Press Writer
FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. - Despite the shrapnel wounds Staff Sgt. William Pinkley suffered during his tour in Iraq (news - web sites), the 26-year-old is joining other soldiers who are re-enlisting at rates that exceed the retention goals set by the Pentagon (news - web sites).
As of March 31 — halfway through the Army's fiscal year — 28,406 soldiers had signed on for another tour of duty, topping the six-month goal of 28,377. The Army's goal is to re-enlist 56,100 soldiers by the end of September.
Pinkley re-enlisted for three more years, citing the camaraderie and the challenge of a new assignment.
"To come out and work with you guys every day, it's a good feeling," Pinkley, 26, told his 101st Airborne Division buddies during the ceremony earlier this month. His wife, Kimberly, watched with a smile, their toddler in her arms.
"It's a very positive retention picture at this point," said Lt. Col. Franklin Childress, an Army public affairs officer. The Army had nearly a half-million active-duty soldiers.
However, Childress cautioned that factors such as an improved economy and the Pentagon's decision to keep about 20,000 troops in Iraq for longer than a year to help quell the violence could change the picture.
Some contend a poor job market and re-enlistment bonuses worth thousands of dollars are keeping soldiers in the Army. Col. Joseph Anderson, commander of the 101st's 2nd Brigade, said it is more about camaraderie, patriotism and duty.
"They've had a personally rewarding and professionally developing experience," Anderson said. "I think they've formed some bonds that are going to last a lifetime. It tends to make them want to stay."
The only Army division to not meet its goal in the six-month period was the 82nd Airborne Division, whose members have been sent to fight in Afghanistan (news - web sites) and Iraq since the Sept. 11 attacks. The division wanted to re-enlist 1,221 soldiers, but got only 1,136.
At Fort Campbell, soldiers from the 101st spent seven months in Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks. The entire division of about 20,000 soldiers was sent to Iraq last year for major combat, and the last planeload returned home in March. A grueling year in Iraq claimed the lives of 61 Fort Campbell soldiers, and hundreds more were wounded.
In the six-month period ending March 31, the 101st topped its goal of re-enlisting 1,591. It got 1,737 to sign up for another tour of duty.
Fort Campbell leaders said their numbers debunk the theory that yearlong combat-zone assignments — not typically used since Vietnam — and the casualties in Iraq would discourage soldiers from re-enlisting.
Shelley MacDermid, co-director of the Military Family Research Institute at Purdue University, said it is too early to know what effect the war in Iraq will have long-term on recruitment and retention.
"If the war were to end tomorrow, the impact on re-enlistments likely would be very different than three years from now," MacDermid said.
Some soldiers, of course, are getting out, for themselves or for their families. ("There's a saying in the Army — `You enlist a soldier, but you re-enlist a family' — and that's true," said Command Sgt. Maj. James Plemons, who oversees retention for the 101st.)
Staff Sgt. Bobby Miller, 31, has spent more than 10 years in the Army said he is getting out when his term ends in less than a year. The 101st soldier has served in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq and said he has barely seen his wife and two children in the past few years.
"It's not that we don't want to deploy; I'd like a little more stabilization," Miller said.
Pinkley was riding in a Humvee the day after Thanksgiving when it was rocked by a bomb. He suffered internal injuries and is still healing from the shrapnel wounds. He said he and his wife discussed for more than a year whether he should re-enlist.
In the end, despite his pain and his wife's fear for his life, they decided it was best for both of them, she said. His next position will be as a drill sergeant at Fort Benning, Ga.
"I'm excited about it," his wife said. "It's something he wanted to do. We told him we'd be supportive of him whatever he wanted." As for the possibility of her husband being sent off to a combat zone again, she said: "We would definitely do it again if we had to."
___
Awww liberals must be cringing knowing that the soldiers morale is not as low as they thought...
Appears our young men have more pride than they give them credit for.
posted on April 23, 2004 11:55:12 PM new
twelve - I read this too....and am so VERY, VERY grateful we have people who feel their country is worth defending/fighting for. Those who have served before....and those now serving. How fortunate we are to still have people with such strong convictions and love of country.
I don't know if you read the Peggy Noonan link I posted on the Pat Tillman thread or not....but she speaks this issue also.
God Bless our Armed Forces, our Vets and our Nation.
posted on April 24, 2004 09:34:16 AM new
I wonder how many of those 28,000 are part of the 20,000 that were retained against their will for the past year for the "stop loss" order ?
It seems to me if I couldn't get out and was held against my will I would re-enlist too and get the bonuses instead of being forced to stay and not get any bonus.
posted on April 24, 2004 02:11:29 PM new
Pretty obivious you know nothing about being in the military...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
It's too bad that their blindness can't see they are killing more soldiers than President Bush ever has... Protest Loud and Proud! Your fellow taliban and insurgents are rejoicing at the support...
posted on April 24, 2004 02:52:36 PM new
twelve - Sometimes I really do believe that may be a BIG part of the problem....they don't understand how things work.
----------------------
reamond - All know when they sign up this is a possibility. All sign on the dotted line....or choose to walk away. No one can predict the future and whether or not this may be necessary, or whether or not we'll go to war when they're serving.
But in this area I do place blame on the past administration....and in a general way...all democratic administrations...they're the ones usually voting against increasing the size of the military...their equipment...etc. And this was especially true during clinton's 8 years.
So if soldiers need to be retained now because we're short handed....then it's [in large] part because it wasn't a value to the clinton administration that we have a large enough military.
posted on April 24, 2004 03:04:44 PM new
I know exactly how it works, you two are the ones that don't know squat about it.
The "stop loss" order has kept people in whose term was up, and it has even forced to stay some that were set to retire.
They get their pay just the same, but what they don't get is re-enlistment bonuses.
So what these 20,000 day-to-day draftees are faced with is either stay in under the "stop loss" order and take your chances or re-enlist and get all the benefits of re-enlisting.
It seems that under the circumstances you'd be pretty dumb not to re-enlist.
BTW, the military strenght has nothing to do with Clinton. The "generals" in Iraq supposedly don't need or want more troops.
The "stop loss" is due to not wanting to pipeline new recruits and not getting qualified recruits.
Rumsfeld wants a smaller military than any democratic president ever proposed.
posted on April 24, 2004 03:22:46 PM new
reamond - Why it would upset you that so many choose to re-enlist BY THEIR OWN CHOICE is way beyond me. You seem to resent that they don't all say 'to hell with this' and quit. They're not quitters, on the whole.
And if you check clinton reduced our military in 7 of the 8 years of his administration. It wasn't a value of his.
posted on April 24, 2004 04:07:07 PM newI know exactly how it works
No you don't and your continued to post on this subject shows exactly how little you do know.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
It's too bad that their blindness can't see they are killing more soldiers than President Bush ever has... Protest Loud and Proud! Your fellow taliban and insurgents are rejoicing at the support...
posted on April 24, 2004 09:12:59 PM new
A good friend that is an AF medical officer was due to retire and open his own practice in May of this year. He just did his last overseas tour, or so he thought.
He got the stop loss order. He could either be held in for as long as they needed him or he could re-enlist and receive quite a bonus and be based state side.
He re-enlisted and took the bonus instead of retiring.
There are at last count 20,000 "draftees" in the same situation.
What amazes me is that you two are so ate up with supporting a creep in the White House that you couldn't even put two and two together to see why the re-enlistment figures are up.
It is just like the unemployment figures that don't count the people whose benefits have run out.
And 12, I'll bet the closest you ever got to the military was perhaps 2 to 3 weeks of basic training before they kicked you out for being a little sissy.
I am begining to understand why you are so rabid about homosexuals. Did you have a "latent" problem with your sexuality ?
posted on April 25, 2004 05:31:22 AM new
You're wrong reamond and now your grasping at straws...
Squirm some more I am enjoying the show...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
It's too bad that their blindness can't see they are killing more soldiers than President Bush ever has... Protest Loud and Proud! Your fellow taliban and insurgents are rejoicing at the support...
posted on April 25, 2004 07:39:34 AM new
No 12. I'm right just like all the other times you've taken silly positions. Everyine who reads this board still laughs at you about people that plea bargain can't appeal.
I've rubbed your nose in your BS so many times your face us starting to look like the rear end of a bull.
posted on April 25, 2004 07:43:54 AM new
Sure reamond, that's your story, however you seem to be forgetting about tnernie... that's ok though... you have believe your a "big" man somewhere, might as well be here.
Must make you feel good to "rub" someone who don't think is very intelligent...
LOL but we both know that 99% of what you post now is pure BS troll material and you don't believe it yourself.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
It's too bad that their blindness can't see they are killing more soldiers than President Bush ever has... Protest Loud and Proud! Your fellow taliban and insurgents are rejoicing at the support...
posted on April 25, 2004 09:20:43 AM new
Critical M.O.S. In war time, Service Extension is a basic need. ALL people with a critical M.O.S. are automatic extended when training has not been completed or qualified enlistment has not provided for those replacements. Redmond's friend if he was a Combat field surgeon or nurse would have held that Critical M.O.S. as does a Combat Medic. Certain types of Combat and non-Combat men & women have Critical M.O.S.'s..
To extend the time of those already in combat operations is done in part for one reason. To complete the training qualified Combat Infantry. Enlistment is up. Unlike Vietnam when drafties were sent to combat with very little training In the late 1960's Most lost their lives. I takes approx. 1.5 years to train people for combat as a unit.
posted on April 25, 2004 12:12:20 PM new
And there are 20,000 being held under the stop loss. A "critical M.O.S." is what the service says it is to suit their needs. It can be Turbo Diesel mechanics if that is what the military is short of.
