early this afternoon i had a plan for this post.... this being my second post of my blog.... it was going to be a play off of my first post, with less anger :) but as the day drifted on i found that my head wasn't in it... i wasn't thinking about that at all.... i found that my mind was whirling around this whole stop loss problem..... all night I've been batting ideas back and forth trying to really figure out what side I'm on and what is the right thing to do..... lol.... ill save you the suspense..... i still don't know..... i have though came to grips with a few things... one, stop loss is a problem.... you cant have so many people up in arms about it, and say it isn't a problem.... i still see the argument from the unpopular side.... i still don't like the idea of losing quality combat soldiers before a deployment..... but there are problems that need to be addressed.....
first i understand the plight of a soldier who enlist for 4 years, deploys, and then is told they cant leave, they must deploy again..... that's not good for anyone.... here you have a guy ( or girl ) who volunteered to fight, did their time, and now whats their own life.... i can respect that..... shit i agree with that..... the question becomes how do we do it.... how do we keep the numbers up, keep the experience up, and let those who have fulfilled their obligate and want out, out....
i have an idea...... now keep in mind that I've been floating this in my head only for a few hours now.... their may be many holes in it but as a basis or foundation for a solution, this could hold water.... what if the army didn't stop stop loss.... instead, when a soldier hits their 2 year window ( 2 years before their contracts up) they have a choose to make a decision..... give the soldier an option to sign a declaration of intent..... at this point the soldier could sign a piece of paper letting the army know his or her intend to not reenlist..... this would give the army plenty of time to find a replacement if the soldiers unit was slated to be deployed or stop loss before that two years is up..... now if you were to deploy and you have more then a year left on your contract you would still have to go.... the idea being that you would get back before your contract was up.... by signing this piece of paper, you now become exempt from stop loss..... if you don't sign this you would then still be subjected to the policy....... there's only three possible places a soldier could be at in his or her mind when they hit the 2 year mark.....
1) I'm going to reenlist.... if they are here then stop loss is a non issue...
2) I'm not going to reenlist.... if they are here then they have an option to declare that and put the army on notice to prepare for their release.... i have more to say about this option, but ill come back to it
3) I'm on the fence..... i don't know what i want to do.... i think most would be surprised at the number of soldiers who would be here and who are here.... many don't know what they want to do at this point...
back to option #2....... to avoid having soldiers who fall into option #3 sign the declaration, they would have to make it harder to reverse your decision.... this becomes hard..... the army isn't going to want to push away good soldiers who change their minds and what to stay, but at the same time they cant create a loop hole for soldiers to avoid stop loss or everyone would use it.. the declaration needs to be for only option #2 soldiers who know whole heartily that they want out.... to do this the only thing i could think of is to have some kind of penalty for reversing a declaration... it has to be severe enough to deter option #3 soldiers from taking advantage of the declaration..... i think to reverse a declaration you would have to give up one rank, and never have to option to use the policy again in your career.... i think this would be severe enough to deter those who are unsure...... but again this is just a preliminary idea that could take on a different shape after i receive more input from others......
as it stands right now, i would rather a soldier be disenfranchised and have to deploy to keep the readiness up then have this policy just stop.... stopping it cold i think would be horribly wrong... it would have a huge negative effect on those who still stay and fight..... but i know their are a lot of you out there who would disagree with me...... look I'm not campaigning for stop loss, but i don't really want to campaign against it either.....
i have a friend of mine who is adamant about stopping stop loss...... he is going to great lengths to have is voice heard.... even though we have debated it back and forth and i will not sign his petition to stop stop loss..... i will post a link to his petition on my blog for those of you who disagree with me..... every voice should be heard...... if you have an opinion, by all means share it.... if you have an idea, share that as well..... if you really believe stop loss should be stopped.... sign the petition..... if you are unsure, then ask questions and get into the debate....
here's the link........
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/end-stop-loss.html
John, let me know if i got the link right would ya.....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
The link works fine Mike.
And thanks.
One thing. I'm not so stubborn that I can't see the other side of the issue.
I understand your point of needing experience.
And, by the way, I like your idea about the declaration.
You do however make on small error.
The powers to be don't want to ask the question that early. They want to believe in their military minds that no one would ever want to get out of the Army. How could they?
What could there be out there that would be anything better.
Sorry, that's for a different day.
It looks like Secretary Gates is working on the issue.
My biggest concern is that dirt bag recruiters start painting a true picture of what this is all about.
A fellow who works for me has a son joining the Marine Corps. The recruiter told his son that if he didn't like it all he had to do was sign a waiver and he could get out anytime.
I say WTF?
lol.... please tell me you told your friend no....
i brought up this issue with some of the nco's i work with... i asked them what they thought about stop loss.... one comment was really insightful....
if stop loss is stopped.... the army would then be forced to lean on inactive reserve as a way to keep the numbers up.... now can you imagine this.... a guy gets out of the army... he gets a great job making a shit load of money.. he buys a new house and a nice new car.... he grows out his beard and starts to get fat.... just living the good life.... one 1-2 years down the road he gets a letter with a big DOD sticker..... he opens it and it says sgt. john doe... you have been activated... report to ft. bragg by this date.... now he has to go... he cant afford his house or his car.. his job is suppose to be there when he comes back, but sometimes its not... so he may lose that great job... his credit will take a hit and now hes fat and has forgotten alot of what soldiers are suppose to know.... this guy is a worse canidate then a stop loss canidate.... but if we stop stop loss this inactive reserve call ups would sky rocket... this would primarily replace stop loss... and you can complain about inactive reserve but they wont change this one.... now instead of matt being stop loss, hes out of the army for a year or two and now has to go back... would you rather matt go now or in two years after hes left the service.....
its something to consider....
I guess I have a lot to say, but I won't do that. First, I'm glad you're thinking about the issue, and how it effects certain soldiers. But, I think the issue is much more simple than creating some declarations that would be hard to track. Seriously, what soldier would get promoted or receive favorable action based on merit if he signs his intent to leave? It's like a slap in the face to the Commander that a soldier is making a decision too rash...
the issue that makes stop loss so wrong must be understood. why are people objecting to it so much? why are people objecting to fighting for their country?
in understanding this question, we must ask whether we are even defending our country. do our policies and the way our soldiers are being used represent America? Do our soldiers agree with how they are being used?
Big fat nope.
Think about it. It wouldn't be an issue that much if it were somethign people believed in. I'm talking about "the mission." You can never stifle opinion and the right to think. The difference between the new Army generation and those before us (except Vietnam) is that today's Army doesn't believe in the mission. It isn't that they are not willing to fight to defend--they are, willingly! It is only when soldiers object to the job and the mission that it becomes an issue. THAT is what has created the shortage and recruiting problem and dissent to stop loss.
Now that the mission is kinda ending, and now that the economy is tanking, people are willing to go back in, in higher numbers to do the things they would not have done 6 months ago under questionable mission objectives.
Notice the transition. More soldiers enlisting is a result of new policy toward the old mission, AND a result of the economy. When the service was something soldiers did not agree with, they stayed away, and were outraged about stop loss. Now that stop loss is being ended, and the mission is ending, people don't mind as much.
The key is to create an environment and a job that soldiers believe in, and one they don't want to leave. We know that soldiers are willing to fight, and willing to defend. But they will NOT willingly fight and defend anything our government asks for. If you take that away, the system will correct itself and it will cease to be an issue.
As an aside, I disagree that the IRR is where soldiers go to get fat and lazy. I know plenty do, but there are plenty who also still live the values that were instilled in them when in service. As an example, the vets club at my school is starting a PT program! :)
So, the thinking that the end of stop loss means more of a reliance on the IRR--that isn't necessarily supported. The truth is that all those soldiers that are leaving Iraq, they'll get their dwell time, and then be used for Afghanistan. With the economy going nowhere fast, and the end of Iraq in sight, recruiters are busy, and will continue to be busy for the foreseeable future.
never stop thinking. never stop writing. keep up the good work, brother, and stay safe.
i think that we have alway had a hard time finding people to fight during war... recruting has always taken a hit while we fight.... during the down periods when we go years without a major conflict is where you see the numbers up and people wanting to stay... once the first bullets start flying... its a different story... once you experience a war zone for a year, its hard to justify in your mind to do it again... thats why people leave..... no one really likes being blown up in explosions.... seeing there friends die..... getting hurt themselfs..... so first chance they get, they leave.... its not a bad thing, its the nature of the beast....
Post a Comment