12 more years of Iraq

[theotherjohn]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050626/ap_on_re_mi_ea/us_iraq

[theotherjohn]

I do not see how the next administration could continue the war without the draft.

man I feel for combat soldiers

[Warriorbird]

Guess they finally came up with an exit strategy.

[Hulkein]

Might've helped to at least read into the second paragraph.


Defeating the insurgency may take as long as 12 years, he said, with Iraqi security forces, not U.S. and foreign troops, taking the lead and finishing the job.

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
Guess they finally came up with an exit strategy.

The bolded part of my previous post has been the exit strategy I've heard of for at least a year now.

[Warriorbird]

:grins: Who're you gonna believe about their readiness? As abrasive as TOJ is at times, I'll go with his assessment.

Originally posted by theotherjohn
I do not see how the next administration could continue the war without the draft.

man I feel for combat soldiers


Eh, its a sucky job but somebody has to do it. :)

[Edited on 6-27-2005 by Dave]

[Atlanteax]

Originally posted by theotherjohn
I do not see how the next administration could continue the war without the draft.

man I feel for combat soldiers

No politician, especially those seeking reelection, will support bringing back the draft.

Now, if we were in WW3, sure... but this is a low-grade (compared to past wars) conflict.

The Army probably will have an easier time gaining recruits if they upped their pay level to be competitive with the civilian sector.

That way, those with the skills handy for logistic support, will be able to join the Army, and perform such duties for their country, without their ability to support themselves and family significantly diminished.

[theotherjohn]

Originally posted by Atlanteax

Originally posted by theotherjohn
I do not see how the next administration could continue the war without the draft.

man I feel for combat soldiers

No politician, especially those seeking reelection, will support bringing back the draft.

Now, if we were in WW3, sure... but this is a low-grade (compared to past wars) conflict.

The Army probably will have an easier time gaining recruits if they upped their pay level to be competitive with the civilian sector.

That way, those with the skills handy for logistic support, will be able to join the Army, and perform such duties for their country, without their ability to support themselves and family significantly diminished.

I agree all public servants pay should be increased

Thats not where the recruiting is running into as many problems Atlanteax, its the jobs that get shot at on a daily basis that are not meeting goals.

There will never be a draft. It costs to much time and money to train a infantryman let alone any of the hundreds of other specialities. War is not as simple as it was during veitnam

[Edited on 6-27-2005 by Dave]

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by theotherjohn
I agree all public servants pay should be increased

Politicians are, by definition, public servants.

Raven

Do they make $14,000 a year for a 24hour a day job?

[xtc]

Even some Republicans on the hill are asking about an exit strategy timetable. I just hope they don't leave the Iraqi people fucked. Iraqi friends of mine have been telling me things were better under Saddam and they are Christians.

[Edited on 6-27-2005 by xtc]

[Gan]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm

Originally posted by theotherjohn
I agree all public servants pay should be increased

Politicians are, by definition, public servants.

Raven

Pay Rates of our public servants in Congress.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/97-1011.pdf


Not too shabby, and this doesnt list the perks such as the healthcare and retirement plans they have options for.

[Atlanteax]

Originally posted by Dave
Thats not where the recruiting is running into as many problems Atlanteax, its the jobs that get shot at on a daily basis that are not meeting goals.

There will never be a draft. It costs to much time and money to train a infantryman let alone any of the hundreds of other specialities. War is not as simple as it was during veitnam

[Edited on 6-27-2005 by Dave]

I disagree on your rebuttal about the recruiting difficulty.

I believe it works like this:

For someone to want to join the Army, the "Reward for being in the Army" must exceed the "Risk of being a casualty".

Reward is compromised of $$ earnings, any patrotic satisfication, skill obtained, etc...

Risk is the measured risk of the liklihood of being on the front and possibly dying.

.

The problem is that over the past few years, the value of the "Reward" does not exceed the "Risk" for those who would otherwise be recruitees.

Upping the pay for the Army would go a long way, especially towards the positions in a support role (ie logistics, as I mentioned in previous post) which would then free up the 18-20 years olds currently doing such work for duty on the front-line.

.

Meanwhile, despite all the deaths of fellow Iraqis in their Army and Police... more keep signing up, because the pay (for them) is enough to prompt them to sign up, despite the risk of becoming a casualty, compared to other career options.

Though for some of them, there is no other career option available until the insurgency is dealt with.

[theotherjohn]

Originally posted by Atlanteax

The problem is that over the past few years

I feel the problem is lack of truth.

Everyone should be told up front that they will be an American soldier and that they will have to deploy, engage and destroy the enemies of America.

It is time to stop the bullshit about joining the Army for school money.

Well, that's partially the Army's fault. Stop giving such high incentives for school and increase pay. Look at all these tuition programs, loan repayments, free schooling.. What do you expect people to join for?

- Arkans

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by Ganalon
Not too shabby, and this doesnt list the perks such as the healthcare and retirement plans they have options for.

Yes, that was exactly the point.

Raven

[Gan]

Originally posted by theotherjohn

Originally posted by Atlanteax

The problem is that over the past few years

I feel the problem is lack of truth.

Everyone should be told up front that they will be an American soldier and that they will have to deploy, engage and destroy the enemies of America.

It is time to stop the bullshit about joining the Army for school money.

Additionally the American public should also realize that the US is in this effort until the new government is stable enough to manage itself and protect its populace on its own. Instead of having panic attacks, or ADHD, or whatever it is that they have that causes them to scream for 'pulling out' after the first casualty takes place (short term attention span applied to long term goals). Yes it sucks that people get killed in wars (inherent and implied risk when you sign up to be a soldier), but until a better alternative for removing armed and violent aggressors from the international theatre than war/armed conflict/whatever you want to call [spin] it exists then thats the way its going to be.

[AnticorRifling]

Originally posted by Arkans
Well, that's partially the Army's fault. Stop giving such high incentives for school and increase pay. Look at all these tuition programs, loan repayments, free schooling.. What do you expect people to join for?

- Arkans

Those are perks those aren't the job. You might take a job knowing it has some perks but you also take the job knowing you are going to do that job.

If you're not willing to do the job and only want the persk then please proceed to get the fuck out. Now, granted, not everyone is fully aware of what the job is and are only aware of the perks (thanks recruiters) but seriously who the hell doesn't know the military in general is a killing force that spends most of it's time away from home?

[DeV]

Originally posted by Ganalon
Additionally the American public should also realize that the US is in this effort until the new government is stable enough to manage itself and protect its populace on its own. Instead of having panic attacks, or ADHD, or whatever it is that they have that causes them to scream for 'pulling out' after the first casualty takes place (short term attention span applied to long term goals). Yes it sucks that people get killed in wars (inherent and implied risk when you sign up to be a soldier), but until a better alternative for removing armed and violent aggressors from the international theatre than war/armed conflict/whatever you want to call [spin] it exists then thats the way its going to be. Toj said it, and well. TRUTH is big and that goes for the American public and what we expect from our government when it comes to war.

I doubt you can call label it panic and be anywhere near close to accurate on that one. Recruiting rates will continue to be at an all time low until the military comes up with some better incentives for their prospects, including letting these girls and guys know that it's not just education and bonuses to look forward to, but some real potentially dangerous occupations that they need to be prepared to face, and accept fully.
It definitely sucks that people get killed in wars, but I think its safe to assume that people collectively know this is going to happen whether we agree with a war or not.

When you have soldiers dying at a rate of 2 per day in a war that we've already declared victory in, well, this is the by product.

[Ravenstorm]

Recruitment will also suffer when the public doesn't believe in the war, considers it a bad idea and when the justification for the war has turned out to be a pack of... disinformation. Funny how people aren't willing to put themselves on the firing line for the above reasons.

Raven