Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Recruiters struggle to find an Army

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 12:51 AM
Original message
Recruiters struggle to find an Army
Source: McClatchy

The Army is struggling to find volunteers for an unpopular war, despite recruiting bonuses of up to $20,000 and pay increases for enlistees that have beaten inflation by 21 percent since 2000.

It met its numeric goal of 80,000 recruits last year, but it paid a price in terms of declining numbers of high school graduates and lower scores on skills and physical tests. The percentage of minimally qualified Army recruits, known as Category IVs, has quadrupled since 2002, and the percentage that required special health or moral waivers has risen sharply as well.

-----

Pentagon and outside experts cite these factors in order of importance:

While risks to U.S. troops are far lower than they were in most previous wars, young adults and their parents find them unacceptably high.

Parents who went to college want their kids to go to college. So do parents who didn't. As the college-bound percentage of high school students has risen to two-thirds, the percentage that intends to enlist in any branch of the military has fallen by nearly two-thirds.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/21203.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 01:04 AM
Response to Original message
1. Looking for an Army? The State Department has one--it's called BLACKWATER. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. You beat me to it....and don't forget our Zeolot Christian Air Force
Acadamy...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
achtung_circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 01:53 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. Once upon a time
the United States Marine Corp was known as the "State Department troops" because they were in existence and were deployed worldwide.

The Army existed primarily as cadre to support expansion in times of war.

The Army has discovered that it likes being large.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. When was this?
I'm a student of military history and am not aware of any period when the Army was reduced to a cadre.

Most of our active divisions have always been Army divisions. Maybe I've misunderstood what you posted.

The Army has done the huge majority of the fighting in all of our wars, including the island-hopping in the Pacific in WWII.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
achtung_circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. 19th century,
most of the early part of the 20th century. It wasn't until after WWII that the US Army became a huge standing force.

One of the challenges of WWII was increasing manning levels to wartime footing from such a very low level. Soldiers are often seen as operating in "less" than the real world.

The US Army was used in the Continental US and for long-term deployments overseas, but the USMC was the tip of the spear.

The Army has now captured a piece of that rapid response capability, and the political perks that go with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Not from my study of History.
Prior to WWI, the Marines NEVER fought above the level of Company EXCEPT on rare occasions (and on those occasions commandeered by Army Officers, for no Marine Officers had any experience commanding units above Company level, thus when Five Marines Companies were sent to Harper's Ferry in 1859 they were under the command of JEB Stuart. The Marines biggest operation during the Civil War was Ft. Fisher, where it was a diversionary attack for the larger Army Attack. In fact the Marines backed up the Sailors who were in the first line of attack (at least the Marines had Rifles, the sailors were given pistols and cutlasses, both Marines and Sailors were massacred).

During WWI for the first time Marines were organized at Battalion level and Brigade level, but the Army was using the "Square Division" of Two infantry Brigades of Two Infantry Regiments with each division having 3 Infantry Battalions (and each Battalion having Three Companies, with four Artillery regiments, engineer, Medical and other support units to add up to 25,000 men per Division). The Marines thought they were having TWO Brigades was the largest they had ever been, but the Army could no figure out how to use them, No Division Support units (i,e, Artillery, engineering, Medical, Transportation and other units). The Marines were merged with a National Guard Division that needed an additional Infantry Brigades (The unit had the Support units to supply the Division but needed an additional Infantry Brigade).

After WWI the Marines started to developed Artillery and support units and during WWII finally formed into Divisions (Triangular Divisions of Three Regiments per Division, each Regiment having Three Battalions of Three Companies, with Support troops about 15,000 men, this reflected the Armies adoption of the triangular Division in 1940 and implementation between 1940 and 1942).

The US Army had used Divisions and Corp (Generally three division to to a Corp) during the Civil War, but reverted to just having Regiments at the end of the War. Divisions and Corp were reformed during the Spanish-American War, WWI and in 1939. Except for those time periods even the Regular Army did NOT have Divisional size units.

Now the National Guard did retain Divisional formation after the Civil War, thus the 28th Division is the oldest Division in the US Army, for it was the Pennsylvania National Guard unit, and Pennsylvania kept its National Guard Regiments formed into a Division after the Civil War and till this day (Other states did the same).

My point is simple, the Marines were used when nothing bigger was available. The Navy was the point, the Marines were used if a small force was needed (company size or less, i.e. 100 men) if more men were needed the Army was used (For Example the Philippines and Cuba during the Spanish Civil War). If you needed Divisional size units the National Guard was called up more for the people who had senior personnel who had experience in moving large number of troops. Thus in 1917, the US army was not readily to fight till 1918. In 1939, a Divisional size unit was tested out in Maneuvers. The Army actually had a plan to raised 267 Divisions during WWII, but then the Navy told them they only could Transport 100 divisions. For this reason the Army Raised 90 Divisions for WWII and the Marines were permitted to have ten divisions (Do to smaller support requirements i.e. no Corp level Troops needed for the Marines, through all Army divisions were formed into Corps, Armies, and then Army Groups).

The Marines were noted by their absence in Europe during WWII (The Navy wanted them in the Pacific and the Navy provided the Corp, Army and Army Group support functions). The Marines did serve in Europe during WWI, Korea and Vietnam, but not as the spear of the military NOT just a part of the Military, like the Army, Navy, Air force and Coast Guard (I have to mention the Coast Guard, during WWII during Guadalcanal and Marines were able to get out of a mess by Covering Fire supplied by a Coast Guard Cutter). All the Services have a function, together they provide a defense to this nation, as a whole not each by themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Fisher
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. The War of 1812, the Civil War, the Mexican War, the Indian Wars, the Spanish-American War, the Phil
These were all in the 19th century and were all fought primarily by the Army.

The "rapid response" force in the 19th century was the Army cavalry.

Between WWI and WWII the Army was pretty small, maybe 200,000. The Navy and Marines were pretty small during that period as well. During the interwar period, the Marines handled the situations in Nicaragua and Haiti.

After 1939, the Army expanded to ninety-two divisions - the Marines, six.

WWII land battles in the Pacific were fought mostly by the Army, despite the popular misconception it was only the Marines.

"The Army has now captured a piece of that rapid response capability..." LMAO.

How generous of you to call the 82nd Airborne, Army Rangers, Army Special Forces, 18th Airborne Corps, etc. "a piece" of the rapid response capability.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brrrp Donating Member (124 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. They could probably staff a complete US military with mercenaries...
Of course, it would cost a lot of money. But it's just our money, so why not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. They've got more Bums With Guns under contract there than they do ACDU personnel nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
2. The title says it all. The economy'd have to get a lot worse to make the military attractive.
Edited on Sat Nov-10-07 01:11 AM by Bozita
Stay tuned.

We're not too sure about the economy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 01:28 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. The Economy Couldn't Get Bad Enough to Make the Army Attractive While it is In Iraq


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. What if you're looking a home foreclosure in the face versus a $15,000 re-up bonus?
Edited on Sat Nov-10-07 01:49 AM by Bozita
And you've got dependents?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mallard Donating Member (460 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 02:14 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Re: economy bad enough to make the army look attractive
That might change.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 03:04 AM
Response to Original message
8. You may think this news is pathetic
but I find it scary. We need an army. So if we can't recruit one, then we have to draft one.

And that's scary. And maddening, since there was no need for this shit at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 04:57 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. We've Got Plenty of Troops if They're Not Fighting in Iraq
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
10. When the oaths and lives of enlisted soldiers can be wasted and ruined...
...by a fake war dreamed up for profit, recruiters have no ideals left to sell. All they can promise is a paycheck.

Make the declaration of war the exclusive province of Congress again, and break the cycle of corporate campaign donations so that Congress represents voters again, and military service will again be an honorable profession supporting national defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
11. The next "recruiting strategy" jail or military
Man With Pot Given Choice: Jail or Military

Salinas man will have to choose between going to jail or joining the military as his punishment for possession of marijuana.

A judge surprised both the prosecution and defense yesterday when he told Brian Barr that he could avoid a jail term by enlisting in the military.

The 24-year-old Barr was charged with marijuana possession after shooting a would-be robber who had entered his apartment with two others.


The military will find a way.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. They did that in the 60s, too. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Relatives told me it happened during Korean war. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Twillig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. "Rather a thousand times the county jail"
26. Knowlt Hoheimer


I was the first fruits of the battle of Missionary Ridge.
When I felt the bullet enter my heart
I wished I had staid at home and gone to jail
For stealing the hogs of Curl Trenary,
Instead of running away and joining the army. 5
Rather a thousand times the country jail
Than to lie under this marble figure with wings,
And this granite pedestal
Bearing the words, ”Pro Patria.”
What do they mean, anyway?



Edgar Lee Masters (1868–1950). Spoon River Anthology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
12. The policy of the United States is . . .
We love dead soldiers more than we love healthy kids. Or good schools. Or bridges that don't collapse. Or a middle class.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC