• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Former G.I.'s, Ordered to War, Fight Not to Go

conjur

No Lifer
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11...ed=print&position=
The Army has encountered resistance from more than 2,000 former soldiers it has ordered back to military work, complicating its efforts to fill gaps in the regular troops.

Many of these former soldiers - some of whom say they have not trained, held a gun, worn a uniform or even gone for a jog in years - object to being sent to Iraq and Afghanistan now, after they thought they were through with life on active duty.

They are seeking exemptions, filing court cases or simply failing to report for duty, moves that will be watched closely by approximately 110,000 other members of the Individual Ready Reserve, a corps of soldiers who are no longer on active duty but still are eligible for call-up.

In the last few months, the Army has sent notices to more than 4,000 former soldiers informing them that they must return to active duty, but more than 1,800 of them have already requested exemptions or delays, many of which are still being considered.

And, of about 2,500 who were due to arrive on military bases for refresher training by Nov. 7, 733 had not shown up.

Army officials say the call-up is proceeding at rates they anticipated, and they are trying to fill needed jobs with former soldiers as they did in the Persian Gulf war of 1991.

Still, the resistance puts further strain on a military that has summoned reserve troops in numbers not seen since World War II and forced thousands of soldiers in Iraq to postpone their departures when their enlistment obligations ended.

Tensions are flaring between the Army and some of its veterans, who say they are surprised and confused about their obligations and unsure where to turn.

"I consider myself a civilian," said Rick Howell, a major from Tuscaloosa, Ala., who said he thought he had left the Army behind in 1997 after more than a decade flying helicopters. "I've done my time. I've got a brand new baby and a wife, and I haven't touched the controls of an aircraft in seven years. I'm 47 years old. How could they be calling me? How could they even want me?"

Some former soldiers acknowledge that the Army has every right to call them back, but argue that their personal circumstances - illness, single parenthood, financial woes - make going overseas impossible now.

Others say they do not believe they are eligible to be returned to active duty because, they contend, they already finished the obligations they signed up for when they joined the military. A handful of such former soldiers, scattered across the country, have filed lawsuits making that claim in federal courts.

These former soldiers are not among the part-time soldiers - reservists and National Guard members - who receive paychecks and train on weekends, and who have been called up in large numbers over the last three years.

Instead, these are members of the Individual Ready Reserve, a pool of former soldiers seldom ordered back to work. Ordinarily, these former soldiers do not get military pay, nor do they train. They receive points toward a military retirement and an address form to update once a year.

When soldiers enlist, they typically agree to an eight-year commitment to the Army but often are allowed to end active duty sooner. Some of them join the Reserves or National Guard to complete their commitment; others finish their time in the Individual Ready Reserve.

For officers, the commitment does not expire unless they formally resign their commissions in writing, a detail some insist they did not know and were not told when they signed their contracts, although Army officials strongly dispute that.

Lt. Col. Pamela Hart, a spokeswoman for the Army, said people in the service are well aware of the provision. "We all know about it," Colonel Hart said.

She said problems with the call-ups of former soldiers have involved a relatively small number of people, are being worked out, and are hardly unique to this conflict. In the first gulf war, she said, more than 20,000 former soldiers were called up. With medical problems and no-shows, only about 14,400 were actually deployed, she said.

Most of the deployments in the first gulf war lasted 120 days, the Army said. The current call-ups are more likely to last a year.

Of those seeking exemptions now, the Army is studying each person's case individually, Colonel Hart said, and has no set rule on what allows a person to avoid deployment. Army officials are still weighing more than half of the requests. So far, only 3 percent of requests for exemptions have been turned down, while 45 percent have been approved.

As for the former soldiers who failed to appear at bases by their assigned dates, the Army is trying to reach them, one by one, to discuss their circumstances, Colonel Hart said. In late September, some Army officials suggested that they would pursue harsher punishments - declaring people AWOL and possibly pursuing military charges - but the Army has since taken a quieter, more conciliatory approach.

"These are challenging times in their lives," Colonel Hart said, adding that some former soldiers who failed to report might have moved and not received the Army's notice. "We're contacting them as best as possible."

For the rest, though, some questions linger over who really qualifies for the callback.

Colette Parrish said she burst into tears the evening that her husband, Todd, walked into their house in Cary, N.C., with a letter from the Army calling him back to service. "We had no idea this could happen," she said. "We hadn't been preparing for any of it because we thought it wasn't possible."

At first, Mr. Parrish, 31, said he was convinced that the letter was just an administrative error because he believed that his time in the Individual Ready Reserve had ended.

He had gone to college on an R.O.T.C. scholarship, then served four years as a field artillery officer. He said he resigned his commission after that, became an engineer, and still owed the Army four years in the Individual Ready Reserve to complete his total obligation.

To Mr. Parrish, who has filed a lawsuit against the Army in federal court in North Carolina, that obligation ended on Dec. 19, 2003. But the Army apparently does not agree, and says that it never accepted Mr. Parrish's resignation as an officer.

As the court fight has continued, Mr. Parrish's date to report to Fort Sill, Okla., has been pushed back, again and again, one month at a time. Instead of thinking about long-term plans, for his wife and their future family, he is living in 30-day increments.

He said he always looked back on his service years fondly, and with a deep sense of patriotism.

"I guess I feel disillusioned now," he said. "This isn't about being for or against the war. It's not about Democrats or Republicans. It's just a contract, and I don't think this is right. If they need more people, shouldn't they get them the right way? How many more like me are there?"

Mark Waple, Mr. Parrish's lawyer, said he had received calls from 30 other former soldiers in recent months, all of whom had heard of Mr. Parrish's case and had similar stories.

At least two other former soldiers have filed suit over the question.

In Hawaii, David Miyasato, a former enlisted soldier who served in the first gulf war, said he would never go AWOL; he would have gone to Iraq, he said, if need be.

But Mr. Miyasato also said that his eight-year commitment ended nearly a decade ago. After he received his letter calling him back to service, he said, he called the Army repeatedly to argue that he was not eligible. Finally, he said, with his date to report to a base in South Carolina just days away, he contacted a lawyer and filed suit on Nov. 5.

"This was actually my last resort," said Mr. Miyasato, a former truck driver and fuel hauler who said that, at 34, he led an entirely different life, with an 8-month-old daughter and a window-tinting company to run. "I had been calling around everywhere for help."

On Nov. 10, Mr. Miyasato said, he learned that the Army had rescinded his orders.

In New York, Jay Ferriola, a former captain in the Army, filed a suit saying he had resigned his officer's commission in June and no longer qualified for call-up in the Individual Ready Reserve. On Nov. 5, the Army rescinded his orders and honorably discharged him.

"This shows that the system works," Colonel Hart said. "If the soldiers bring their situations to our attention, we're going to do what's right."

Barry Slotnick, Mr. Ferriola's lawyer, said he wondered how many other soldiers might be in similar positions, but without the money, the contacts or the certainty to sue. Mr. Slotnick said he had received numerous calls from others since he filed Mr. Ferriola's case in late October.


"We might as well add another phone bank," Mr. Slotnick said. "What I can see is that there are many, many cases of people being called up that shouldn't have been. This is a backdoor draft. I also have to wonder how many are already in Iraq who shouldn't be there, who just didn't think to question it."

The Army's current plan is to fill 4,400 jobs through March from among 5,600 former soldiers ordered to duty. But an Army official said last month that more former soldiers, perhaps in similar numbers, might be called on later next year, as well.

For now, those being sent to Iraq and Afghanistan are being asked to handle a variety of support positions, including truck drivers and fuel and food suppliers.

Months ago, the Army said some of the former soldiers would be needed to play the French horn, the clarinet, the euphonium, the saxophone and the electric bass as part of the military's bands, but the notion drew criticism from members of Congress who questioned the need to order people to give up their civilian lives to play instruments. Colonel Hart said the Army has since filled the musician jobs with volunteers. 😕

Before going to Iraq, former soldiers are receiving as many days of training as they need, an Army spokesman said. Some of the soldiers said they were worried, though, about the prospect and safety of trying to get up to speed in a few months.

"These guys like me are basically untrained civilians now," said Mr. Howell, the former helicopter test pilot. Mr. Howell said he left the Army years ago with an injured back, knee and elbow, leaving him wondering about his own physical condition.

"I don't even have a uniform anymore," he said. "But they don't have any more reserves left, so we're it. All they want is some bodies to go to Iraq, just someone to be there, to sit on the ground."

When he left the military in 1997 as part of a reduction in forces, Mr. Howell said, he saw a note in the "little print" in his annuity agreement about a future commitment. But he said he was told that his obligation to the Individual Ready Reserve would be brief and meant little anyway. "They said it was just a way of having me on the books," he said.

After that, Mr. Howell said, he jumped into the civilian world. He got married. He and his new wife began building a house. They struggled to have children.

In September, his first child, Clayton, was born. Just before that, his orders arrived.

"It does rip my heart out that these young men and women are over there, and there is part of me that wants to be with them," he said recently. "But I have responsibilities here now."

Mr. Howell said he had applied to the Army for an exemption but was recently turned down. If he loses his appeal, he will be given a new reporting date. His best hope, he said, is that his appeal is buried somewhere at the very bottom of a big stack of them.
Pretty bad when a civilian has to resort to filing a lawsuit in order to keep from being recalled.
 
but remember, the concept of a draft under a 2nd Bush term is just a crazy, internet-based hoax made up by desperate Democrats...

Is there really much of a difference between what is happening now and a draft?

People who have never fired a gun are being sent to Iraq?

In the words of those annoying new Guiness Beer commercials......"Brilliant!"
 
Government looking at military draft lists
http://www.brownsvilleherald.c....php?id=62232_0_10_0_C
McALLEN, November 15, 2004 ? It?s taken one year, seven months and 19 days of combat in Iraq for the Lone Star State to lose 100 of its own.

Texas is the second state, after California, to lose 100 service members, according to The Associated Press.

With continuing war in Iraq and U.S. armed forces dispersed to so many other locations around the globe, Americans may be wondering if compulsory military service could begin again for the first time since the Vietnam War era.

The Selective Service System (SSS) and the U.S. Department of Education now are gearing up to compare their computer records, to make sure all men between the ages of 18 and 25 who are required to register for a military draft have done so.

The SSS and the education department will begin comparing their lists on Jan. 1, 2005, according to a memo authored by Jack Martin, acting Selective Service director.

While similar record checks have been done periodically for the past 10 years, Martin?s memo is dated Oct. 28, just a few days before the Nov. 2 presidential election, a hard-fought campaign in which the question of whether the nation might need to reinstate a military draft was raised in debates and on the stump.

It took several more days, until Nov. 4, for the document to reach the Federal Register, the official daily publication for rules and notices of federal agencies and organizations.

The memo was also produced after the U.S. House voted 402-2 on Oct. 5, against House Resolution 163, a bill that would have required all young people, including women, to serve two years of military service.

Under federal law, a military draft cannot be started without congressional support.

About 94 percent of all men are properly registered for a draft, according to Richard Flahavan, associate director of the office of public and intergovernmental affairs for SSS.

Martin?s memo is just a routine thing, Flahavan said.

?Back in 1982 a federal law was passed that basically linked federal grants, student loans and federal assistance to students with Selective Service,? Flahavan said. ?You had to register with Selective Service with a Social Security number (in order to receive federal assistance), and as a consequence of the law the Department of Education came up with an agreement on how to exchange and compare data to comply with the law.

?It just so happens that the current agreement in effect expires next month,? Flahavan said. ?All we did is update the agreement slightly, but it has no substantive changes. There is nothing new or shocking to link this to some type of draft right around the corner because its all been in place for almost 18 years.?

Flahavan said the written agreements between SSS and the Department of Education normally run for about four or five years and suggested that a reporter search the 1999 or 2000 records of the Federal Register for the most agreement.

A search of the Federal Register by The Monitor found four such agreements between the two agencies, with effective dates as follows: Jan. 1, 1995; July 1, 1997; Jan. 1, 2000; and July 1, 2002.

All four agreements lasted for 18 months, during which time the SSS and the Department of Education could complete their comparisons.

The most recent agreement, which began July 1, 2002, actually expired Jan. 1, 2004, according to federal records located by The Monitor.

?This has nothing to with current events,? Flahavan said. ?This is just the periodic renewal of previous agreements ? this one is 18 months but normally it runs four years and that?s why we?re doing it now. I?m not quite sure why it?s 18 months versus the normal number of years.?

Flahavan said the agency was required to place the agreement in the Federal Register.

?That?s fine and we did,? Flahavan said. ?We believe the public wouldn?t stand for a draft that isn?t fair and equitable.

?And the only way to be fair and equitable is if everyone who should register is registered, because that?s the pool from which the people who would be drafted would be selected from. So you want everyone who should be in the pot in the pot,? Flahavan said.

U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, who officially begins representing western Hidalgo County residents in January, said Congress has voted on record against a draft.

?It was a near unanimous vote in the House,? Doggett said. ?When things are filed in the Federal Register, there will be standards, and they are a reminder that if we cannot get more international participation that the risk of a draft remains out there.

?And I think we do need people to remain watchful of this possibility.?

Doggett said one type of ?draft? was already being used by the military.

?I?m concerned that a very real form of the draft is there now for those already in the service,? Doggett said. ?People are being forced to stay in beyond their commitment, and that?s an indication of being overextended.

?I want us to pursue policies that don?t overextend us and involve more international participation, so that Americans don?t have to do all the dying and endure all the pain for these international activities,? Doggett said.

Flahavan said the computer records check would help Selective Service with its compliance rates.

?From 1999 to 2000, it was dropping about a percent a year,? Flahavan said. ?It?s now inching back up about a percent a year. Last year it was 93 percent.

?At the end of 2004 we anticipate about a 94 percent compliance rate,? Flahavan said. ?We?re pleased we?ve got it back on the rise and that?s where we want to keep it ? that?s our goal.?

Draft Gear Up?
Who Has To Register?
All male U.S. citizens and male aliens living in the U.S. between the ages of 18 and 25
Dual nationals of the U.S. and another country, regardless of where they live
Young men who are in prison or mental institutions do not have to regsiter while they are committed, but must do so if they are released and not reached age 26
Disabled men who live at home and can move about indiependently.
Myths
Contrary to popular belief, only sons and the last son to carry a family name must register and they can be drafted.
What Happens In A Draft
Congress would likely approve a military draft in a time of crisis, in which the mission requires more troops than are in the volunteer military.
Selective Service procedures would treat married men or those with children the same as single men.
The first men to be called up will be those whose 20th birthday falls during that year, followed by those age 21, 22, 23,24 and 25.
The last men to be called are 18 and 19 years of age.
Historical Facts
The last man to be drafted was in June 1973.
Number of Drafted for WWI : 2.8 million
Number of Drafted for WWII: 10 million
Number of Drafted for the Korean War: 1.5 million
Number of Drafted for the Vietnam War: 1.8 million
Source: Selective Service System

Sssshhhhhhh....
 
Originally posted by: AntiEverything
So IRR = Civilian?

That's what the IRR is. You can be called back up. I'm not sure where the confusion lies.
The confusion lies with your reading comprehension problems.


To Mr. Parrish, who has filed a lawsuit against the Army in federal court in North Carolina, that obligation ended on Dec. 19, 2003. But the Army apparently does not agree, and says that it never accepted Mr. Parrish's resignation as an officer.

Mr. Miyasato also said that his eight-year commitment ended nearly a decade ago. After he received his letter calling him back to service, he said, he called the Army repeatedly to argue that he was not eligible. Finally, he said, with his date to report to a base in South Carolina just days away, he contacted a lawyer and filed suit on Nov. 5.

In New York, Jay Ferriola, a former captain in the Army, filed a suit saying he had resigned his officer's commission in June and no longer qualified for call-up in the Individual Ready Reserve. On Nov. 5, the Army rescinded his orders and honorably discharged him.
 
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: AntiEverything
So IRR = Civilian?

That's what the IRR is. You can be called back up. I'm not sure where the confusion lies.
The confusion lies with your reading comprehension problems.


To Mr. Parrish, who has filed a lawsuit against the Army in federal court in North Carolina, that obligation ended on Dec. 19, 2003. But the Army apparently does not agree, and says that it never accepted Mr. Parrish's resignation as an officer.

Mr. Miyasato also said that his eight-year commitment ended nearly a decade ago. After he received his letter calling him back to service, he said, he called the Army repeatedly to argue that he was not eligible. Finally, he said, with his date to report to a base in South Carolina just days away, he contacted a lawyer and filed suit on Nov. 5.

In New York, Jay Ferriola, a former captain in the Army, filed a suit saying he had resigned his officer's commission in June and no longer qualified for call-up in the Individual Ready Reserve. On Nov. 5, the Army rescinded his orders and honorably discharged him.

conjur is right in this case. However (comma) Every 1st term of enlistment comes with an 8 year total commitment. It's laid out in black and white before any servicemember signs the proverbial dotted line. n Now, whether the term is served 4 years active / 4 years inactive reserve, 6 years active/ two years inactive reserve, 8 years Active, 2 years active/6 years inactive reserve, or 4 year active/4 years active reserve or any other way you want to cut it. The service commitment is 8 years. When we voulenteer, it's in the contract and the individual is made well aware of it before they are ever sworn in. Therefore it is not a Draft. Neither is stop loss IMO. Stop loss just comes with the territory and any service member with any integrity will tell you so. I am currently seperated on inactive ready reserve and if my letter comes then I have nothing to b!tch about and I'll go. Does all of this apply to the officer mentioned above? No and I never said it did. He has a legitimate case, but I felt it was necessary to shed some light on the inactive ready reserve and debunk some of the "back door draft" BS.
 
Everyone keeps saying there will not be a draft. I somehow feel worried that will change in the near future. Either that or we will have to eventually have to start pulling troops out of other countries like Italy, south Korea, Japan, Germany, and other european countries. We have thousands of Troops in Germany and South Korea to send.

I got out of the Army in a while back because I was overweight. It must have been about 15 years ago. I am guessing in 1986? I seriously doubt they would call back someone who is 46 and weight 340lbs. I guess I would have long ago served any possible committment.

I know exactly the kind of thing a recruiter would say. "Oh they never call anyone up from inactive reserve!" Recruiters arent know to be the most forthcoming open and honest people. When you sign up they probably give you about 20 or more documents to sign. Boom, boom, boom here sign this. Sure they probably explain it real quick and kind of non-challantly. It is not like they have a training video they force you to watch explaining the committment and what your rights will be like they should have.
 
Your first article dipsh1t. It says right there:
These former soldiers are not among the part-time soldiers - reservists and National Guard members - who receive paychecks and train on weekends, and who have been called up in large numbers over the last three years.

Instead, these are members of the Individual Ready Reserve, a pool of former soldiers seldom ordered back to work. Ordinarily, these former soldiers do not get military pay, nor do they train. They receive points toward a military retirement and an address form to update once a year.
Perhaps YOU should brush up on your reading comprehension.
 
conjur you have short term memory loss, I corrected your endless blunders and innacuracies on the "back door draft" months ago. And now you go and try to pull up the same BS. you must have noticed I havent been on the board in a while, thought maybe you had a window?
 
Originally posted by: AntiEverything
So IRR = Civilian?

That's what the IRR is. You can be called back up. I'm not sure where the confusion lies.


Did you read the article? Most of the cases involved people who had finished their IRR time tears ago. I myself finished mine almost 5 years ago, so I can sympathize

 
Originally posted by: AntiEverything
Your first article dipsh1t. It says right there:
These former soldiers are not among the part-time soldiers - reservists and National Guard members - who receive paychecks and train on weekends, and who have been called up in large numbers over the last three years.

Instead, these are members of the Individual Ready Reserve, a pool of former soldiers seldom ordered back to work. Ordinarily, these former soldiers do not get military pay, nor do they train. They receive points toward a military retirement and an address form to update once a year.
Perhaps YOU should brush up on your reading comprehension.
Keep reading, "dipsh1t". You stopped too soon. I even went to the trouble of quoting the relevant passages for you.
 
Originally posted by: Train
conjur you have short term memory loss, I corrected your endless blunders and innacuracies on the "back door draft" months ago. And now you go and try to pull up the same BS. you must have noticed I havent been on the board in a while, thought maybe you had a window?
Wow. There's an epidemic of the reading disabled today.
 
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Originally posted by: AntiEverything
So IRR = Civilian?

That's what the IRR is. You can be called back up. I'm not sure where the confusion lies.


Did you read the article? Most of the cases involved people who had finished their IRR time tears ago. I myself finished mine almost 5 years ago, so I can sympathize

I've got a DD214 from when I was discharged three years ago. When I get called up I'll let you know.

Oooooh, I'm scared of the big bad back door draft. Ooooooh! Look out! Behind you! The sky is falling!
 
There will be no draft. our government is not willing to draft women and men. could you imagine thousands of wives, mothers and bank tellers being drafted? our country would crumble....

 


[/quote]

I've got a DD214 from when I was discharged three years ago. When I get called up I'll let you know.

Oooooh, I'm scared of the big bad back door draft. Ooooooh! Look out! Behind you! The sky is falling![/quote]

Sure hope that was sarcasm .... Nobody here says the sky is falling, but it is still unsettling that our government is pulling this kind of crap with veterns then saying there will be no draft. My money is on a draft.
 
The down and dirty of this is that a draft would destroy our fighting forces. As it stands the military is an all voulenteer force. In other words, at one time or another every member of the armed forces wanted to be there. The ones who don't wish to stay get out and the ones who do wish to stay re-up. It keeps morale high and riff-raff down. Now if the government starts forcing every pot-smoking tom dick and harry into the military, privates would be giving Colonel's the bird, disgrunteled troops who never wanted to be there in the first place would be selling secrets to the Red Chinese Army, mutiny and treason would run amok and our national defense would self destruct because of all the animosity, lack of core values, and insubordination. To put it bluntly, a draft is a terrible idea and I believe our leaders know this.

Need I rememd folks once again that it was Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) who was the chief sponser of HR-163 a.k.a. Universial National Service Act of 2003, which by the way made it to congress DOA.

Now I know folks here aren't accustomed to lending this administration a great deal of credit, but you have to be certifiably nuts to believe that our government will be bringing back the draft anytime soon.

Furthermore, to say "Can you smell what Bush has cooking? ssshhhhh....don't say the "D" word" is automatically a misnomer since it takes more than Bush and Bush alone to instate a draft.

My .02
JR..
 
He's not going to do a draft yet.

I think he'll get on the TV and ask for more volunteers. And then all the Bush fanboys will volunteer for him to go.

It's a win win!:thumbsup:
 
Look this should not surprise anyone. The Army has had these problems for many years. Think back to Desert Storm and Somalia. The problem with the Army is their structure, the entire force is to heavy and way to many commanders. Currently they outsize the Marine Corps three times over. Yet we have had to bail them out of four different conflicts. I say if they cannot unscrew themselves the we should do away with them all together.....
 
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Originally posted by: AntiEverything
So IRR = Civilian?

That's what the IRR is. You can be called back up. I'm not sure where the confusion lies.


Did you read the article? Most of the cases involved people who had finished their IRR time tears ago. I myself finished mine almost 5 years ago, so I can sympathize


These members that were sent orders but have fulfilled their agreement will "NOT " be made to go back into the service. They'll just have to deal with the military red tape to prove they have completed their obligation and they'll be left alone. They should be compensated by the Government if they have to spend time proving their end IMO i.e: going to court / going to an office ... anything out of their way ect.
 
Back
Top