"But for now, the Army is meeting its recruiting goals."

Mayberry Machiavelli

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Nov-11-04 08:38 PM
Original message

"But for now, the Army is meeting its recruiting goals."

This, or something like it, is what I hear whenever there is a news article in print or broadcast about military recruiting.

HOW COULD THIS POSSIBLY BE TRUE WHEN ANYONE IS BEING STOP-LOSSED OR INVOLUNTARILY CALLED UP AS AN "INACTIVE RESERVE"?

Or when people in the reserves and National guard are being called up every other year?

Can anyone explain this to me? Or are the "recruitment goals" always, by definition, being met under Bush so uncomfortable "drafty" talk doesn't get started? :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Inland

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Nov-11-04 08:41 PM
Response to Original message

1. Haven't seen it lately, but

Edited on Thu Nov-11-04 08:42 PM by Inland

I think there is a difference between reserve recruiting and regular forces recruiting. Reserve is way, way down. Regular isn't, probably because someone wanting to be a professional soldier is less deterred by the concept of a few years of deployment.

Plus, if you look at who is bearing casualities in Iraq, its reserves. The toll on reserves in the Fallujah is high. Reserves provide the truck drivers and checkpoint guards who get killed.

Since the reserves are necessary for the Iraq war, any recruiting lag is serious trouble short and long term.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Zero Gravitas

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Nov-11-04 08:42 PM
Response to Original message

2. Recruitment goals

Edited on Thu Nov-11-04 08:44 PM by WorstPresidentEver

I would guess that the recruitment goals have not changed much. They are based on the idea that Operation Cakewalk would be a success and the only security problem in Iraq today would be keeping back throngs of happy Iraqis at the unveiling of statues of Bush. IN other words they are still hoping for a 180 change in direction of the security situation in Iraq and won't be needing a couple hundred thousands extra troops to keep the lid for the next 5 years.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

HawkerHurricane

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Nov-11-04 08:53 PM
Response to Original message

3. Same old game.

When they fall short of quota, they change the quota and claim they met it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri Apr 19th 2024, 10:18 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

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.