Tonight on ABC nightly news....WTF!

[Mnemosyne]

Why soldiers are reinlisting at surprising rate!

This is why I don't watch much mainstream media anymore.

They are idgits.

[aquart]

1. No jobs, maybe?

Threats?

[SidDithers]

2. A surprisingly low rate, maybe... nt

Sid

[Catfight]

3. Because there are no domestic REAL jobs...this is the beginning

of fascism. Most of those people reenlisting are poor and lower class with little opportunity to find a good paying decent job in America. The American dream is rapidly becoming the Bush Regime nightmare.

Boot Bush!

[BlueEyedSon]

4. This is BS. I know a recruiter. He says "business is lousy".

[Cocoa]

5. Jennings is going to Gitmo on Friday

as a reporter, not as a terrorist.

It should be good, he'll probably find it to be quite humane, maybe even comfy. We'll all probably envy the lucky terrorists.

[Spazito]

6. Given that they keep lowering the quota number, any enlistment #

over 10, would be a surprising rate of enlistment.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

7. Well, one possible explanation...

...other than no jobs at home is that they are being tricked/forced into it by unscrupulous recruiters. I had heard a news story recently about recruiters telling soldiers that they had no choice -- they were required to reinlist. I wonder how commonplace that sort of thing is.

[mzmolly]

8. From what I understand they are told their tour will be extended and they

will have to go back to Iraq if they don't? I doubt their are any guarantees they won't go back anyhow?

[Merlin]

9. This is RE-enlistments, not new recruiting. The reason is psychological.

These guys have been over there as part of an operation which they believe in. Why?

First, they have zero real contact with Iraqis and zero real sense of what it's like to be an Iraqi.

Second, they see RE-building as a good thing, without awareness of the fact that our forces destroyed it to begin with.

Third, they are heavily propagandized, told the liberal media hates them and distorts what they're doing, and inculcated with crusader like zeal.

[Redhead488]

11. The Philadelphia Inquirer seems to agree that recruiting is up...

The Army is taking casualties almost daily in Iraq and Afghanistan. And a new policy - affecting units designated for overseas deployment - promises to delay some soldiers' plans to leave the service. But the Army is having no trouble finding recruits, and has been ahead of recruiting goals each month this year, officials said yesterday.

About 7,477 soldiers were signed up last month for the active Army - 262 more than the targeted number; 2,399 troops were recruited for the Army Reserve - 172 more than the goal.

"A whole range of factors impinge on recruitment," said S. Douglas Smith, a spokesman for the Army Recruiting Command at Fort Knox, Ky. "The economy, employment, deployments... it's affected by many things. "All I know is we're doing very well. We're coming in ahead of mission."

So far this year, about 49,000 of the targeted annual goal of 77,000 enlistees have been recruited for the active Army, Smith said. Nearly 12,000 of the 21,200 soldiers needed for the Army Reserve have been signed up. The active and Reserve forces also have exceeded annual recruiting needs over the last four years. At the same time, some state National Guards have seen the number of recruits drop off slightly, in part, because fewer active-duty members are moving over to the Guard.


http://www.guardfamily.org/A00_admin/A0017_news%5Chtm%5C06_08_2004_NYCU.htm

[Qanisqineq]

16. Reenlistment isn't up everywhere

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=56616

Plus, many are offered $20,000 tax free if they re-enlist.

[Spazito]

Could the military be using the stop-loss figures as re-enlistment...

numbers? I, for one, wouldn't be surprised.

[Redhead488]

12. Not likely

since a re-enlistment is a contract...stop-loss is just enforcing the fine print on that contract.

[Spazito]

13. LOL yes, that is true but this admin doesn't always look at fine print as

"fine print". They will report false numbers as easily as they can say their own names, a good example of that was the error-filled terror attack report.

[Redhead488]

14. True, perhaps

But it's pretty easy to distinguish stop-loss from re-enlisting.

[Spazito]

17. That is what I am wondering...

will there be public figures that will definitively show that there are two seperate sets of figures for stop-loss and new re-enlistments or will it simply be one set of figures given for re-enlistments?

I tend to have a stats focus when #s start being thrown around so this story interests me. I hope the media outlet will go into depth re the numbers.

[Redhead488]

18. If that were the case

the numbers would be MUCH higher than what has been reported. Since stop-loss affected a significant portion of the army.

[Spazito]

22. Very good point!

I hadn't thought about that aspect, thanks! I will be watching the coverage with interest for sure.

[cocoabeach]

10. It has been a high percentage since 9/11

2 guys at my command volunteered for Iraq. They beleive in what they are doing is for the good of the country. They want to be part of it and the combat pay is a factor also. Everyone knows that civilians make alot more money but they stay in because they love it.

[Bridget Burke]

19. Don't they understand that 9/11 had NOTHING to do with Iraq?

Civilians can make more money--if they can find jobs.

[Redhead488]

20. Not all civilians can

Staying in for a career can lead to a decent salary, relatively speaking. Unfortunately, there's that "might get my head blown off in a war" thing working against ya.

[AndyTiedye]

23. A Nasty Thought

After seeing what is going on at Abu "Redemption" enlistments are up?
Could there be that many sadistic sickos in the country?
People like Rush who think that torture is just a good way to have fun,
like a fraternity prank or something?

[cspiguy]

15. too much Nintendo and PS/2

n/t

[Malva Zebrina]

21. whatever--if this is true

we gotta support the troops, right?

I cannot at this point find an excuse for it. We have grown, if this is true, a cold, hard uncaring generation that is selfish, as much enamored of bullying of the commander in chief who apparently cheated his country in wartime and went AW
OL.;

I mean now that we are there, we may as well accept it, and put the stamp of approval on invasion, murder, killing and violence against innocent peoplr and support the ones who are shooting the bullets and aiming the bombs.

Put out those yellow ribbons now for the ultimate in hypocrisy and spin lest someone accuse you of not being patriotic or not supporting the soldier who shoots the bullets and drops the bombs on innocent people because he was helpless and only following orders.

There are no heroes here.

[chookie]

24. Then why is "stop-loss" necessary?

If The Military adore His Chimperial Highness so much, and are so keen on sacrificing their lives for his holy war on Iraq that they are signing up enthusiastically in such numbers -- why then has "Stop-Loss" been an issue at all?

Something tells me this is a Soviet-style statistic, like the ones they used to crow about -- that food productivity had gone up 800%, that tractor production is up 1008%, etc.

But don't mind me -- I'm still trying to figure out where all the jobs Bush says he created are....um, in India?

[DocSavage]

25. targeted stop loss

More than likly, there are specific MOS's that are being targeted for stop loss. There is most likly one for physicians, OR nurses, OR techs some combat MOS's like intelligence and special ops. Units that are about to be deployed may request specific individuals that are mission critical to be stop-lossed, but that is hard to do.

You have to remember that it takes a lot of time to grow a sgt with infantry experience. You cannot just recruit some kid from Kansas and expect him in 2 years to have the experience of a grunt that has been doing it for 5. The learing curve will decrease with more combat expereinced people moving into training positions at boot camp and AIT.