Why can't soldiers quit the military?

Why do they have to sign up for a certain amount of time, sign a contract? Is the military afraid too many would quit early? Do they want to guarantee that they get some payback for the training (hear tell that it tkaes a person at least 6 months to start making money for a business to overcome the amount used in training them in the position)?

Seriously, I wonder why they must sign up for a certain amount of time and cannot quit before then. Anyone wiser than me know? Thank you.

Edited to add, I know they have to sign contracts, they have to sign up for a certain amount of time. But why do they have to do this?

Not that I agree with it, but:

Enlisted Soldiers sign contracts. The problem is that there is no "escape" or "out" clause in these contracts. So, the military really has them by the balls legally.

Many enlistees try suicide as a way out, especially during basic training. They can't take the stress of that environment. They have no way out, so they attempt suicide. Once they are that desperate, they are discharged. But, they are (at least they were when I was in) treated like dirt until their discharge.

going back to add this to my OP. Why do they have contracts?

IMHO the number of suicides is actually relatively small as a percentage, it's about the same as it was in gulf storm I. The current number that can be attributable to a failure to "get out of a contract" isn't even published to my knowledge.

If you are gonna post such stuff as "many" I wish you would provide some measure of what the hell "many" is and provide a link to support it so that I can adjust my opinion in an appropriate manner.

Trainees try suicide all of the time. Dont believe me? Read the book "Mud Soldiers". I also base my comments on my three year assignment at an Army Training Center. The Army keeps it quite, but it happens - a lot. The Army always tries to cover up bad news. So, what the hell do you think about that, John Wayne?

that can mean just about anything that a reader interprets them to mean. You say nothing about what their measure is.

If you have something like the rate of suicide attempts per 1000 recruits because of failure to break their enlistment comittment then POST IT and give a credible link for it that can be checked out.

If you think the book you cite has something to say THEN QUOTE IT verbatim and give a reference to the page and reference the source of that information. That source should be in a footnote to the text or an endnote for the chapter.

The last reference I saw published on military suicide said military suicides had risen to levels of Gulf Storm I. I found that to be a something of a surprise since it was lower than I expected.

I'm also calling bullshit on your calling me names. I'm a veteran, not fucking John Wayne. Your name calling is totally unecessary. Cough up the data and a source and I'll judge it.

I disagreed with your claim; I didn't call you a name. How about showing a fellow veteran the same respect? I personally trust your original claim less because you find it necessary to make ad hominem attack rather than providing better numbers and a better reference to them. Show me that I'm wrong. I'm a critical reader but I can be educated.

two to three successful suicides per year. Out of o/a 70K trainees per annum, that's not many. Agreed AF basic wasn't/isn't tough as compared to the USMC, but it's still stressful. And no I don't have a link, just personal knowledge from my recruit wrangling days.

Dirty little secret: The military isn't out to destroy its resources, at least until it's gotten some use out of them. Driving even 10% of the recruits to the wall would be an intolerable waste even for the DoD. Plus, it would be pissing off too many tax paying moms and dads.

As for the initial question: A set number of years allows time to get the personnel up to speed vis-a-vis training and experience. Even for enlisted, some of the jobs call for a year's worth of tech training before troop gets to on-the-job training and the tech training is only to the apprentice level. There's another 6 months minimum to a year before troop is fully qualified. Troop's half way through his hitch before he's of any real value.

Also, most of us would at some point or another would tell Sugie to take the job and do something rude and anatomically impossible with it. It's a rigid, hierarchical, authoritarian way to make minimum wage and it's hard to take at times.

A set number of years on the contract also applies to officers, by the way. For example, it takes 18 months to get a Navy pilot minimumly qualified at a cost of several mill.

that has a lot of small print on it. They are required to complete their commitment, unfortunately now they are employing "stop loss" or not letting you go when your time is up, and recalling people whose commitment is over, but the fine print says they can call you back for 6 more years.

And yeah, not asking about stop-loss which is another thing, but just wondering in general why they have to start out with a contract. Most jobs don't have contracts, just wondering why.

....just a guess - so they can't run off en masse once they find out what a nasty business war is? I dunno.......

to Congress, it cost about twenty grand to put a kid through basic. Each kid. That's everything from the recruiting expenses, to the plane fare to the boot camp, to the initial uniform issue, the chow, the rack (that's a bed) and linens, the medical exams, eye exams, dental exams and ameliorative treatment (cavities, glasses, repair of that fungus toenail, and so forth), the drill instructors/company commanders, the infrastructure to support them at the training facility (swimming pool, track, exercise grounds, armory, range, the barracks themselves) and so on. That's not counting additional schooling following initial entry training. That's not counting the pay they get while they do their leave after basic, or the cost of executing those initial orders.

It's expensive. It's probably much more than the rough figure I cited here, nowadays. You can't have people racking up those sorts of bills and then changing their minds. It's a disservice to the taxpayers if you do. That's one of the reasons why the enlistment contract is so tight.

And to (whomever below that answered about your company charging if you quit early), thank you. Thinking back, recall that it takes 6 months to start making money off someone in a job, after training, etc. Takes a yr to break even in many civilian jobs. Thank you for your answers.

pie--it's not part of the recruitment/initial training piece, but we, the taxpayers, still pay for it. I'm not talking about the "Smith, charge the pillbox" business discussed below (though that point, the good order and discipline aspect, is completely valid and essential to the military's readiness), I'm talking about assignments.

When you send someone to do a job at an installation, they are there for two or three years, depending on their rotation and other factors, like, if they're married or single (married people stay in one place longer, because of the added expense of moving the family, spouse, kids, furniture, and so forth) or if their specialty requires that the do frequent operational tours.

The recruits who are in boot camp are SLATED to replace junior personnel at the installations. If the kid drops out, the installation scheduled to receive the new servicemember has to DO WITHOUT until they can find (recruit/train) another body to fill the bill. In lean years, you can have 'gapped' or unfilled billets for a year or two. That affects the mission of the installation. They can try to keep the person in the billet on, but usually, they've been promoted and they need to start doing jobs with more responsibility, and there's another installation commander who wants his or her servicemember, and they get to have them, unless there is a serious money crunch and they can save cash by leaving everyone in place--they do that every so often, but not for too long, because it affects readiness if you have a kid who has the skills of an E-5 doing an E-3 job. Not good for the kid's career progression, and not good for the installation to start relying on spare talent that they don't merit in a manpower review.

It's a big Rube Goldberg device, the way that people are shuffled about, and if you have a screwup in the pipeline, it can make it difficult for military leaders all over the world, in operational assignments and desk-flying ones.

It's our military, like it or not. We pay for it. I just wish the civilian suits running it had a damn clue, the feckless bastards.

My honest opinion was that the Army could have been so much better. I'm talking about basic, AIT and permanent party. We have all of the high ranking civilians and generals, but they never do seem to get it right. It is our military and I think things could be better. The Army seems preoccupied with uniform changes. In my opinion, every penny spent on berets should have gone into training.

Is it realistic to force people to stay? I felt that the Army Drill Sergeants could have spent more time training us and less time fucking with us. I understand that DI's have an image to uphold. They put on the brown smokey the bear hat, and they have to live up to the reputation as tough, mean and nasty. But they seemed to care more about screaming, yelling and insulting more than anything else. On the other hand, how they took a bunch of young civilians and turned us into Soldiers is a miracle to me! I respected them for that. They just could have been a little less vicious.

doing (whatever) voluntarily gets more done in less time with less resources than forcing the worker. Brainwashing a group of young people/molding them into a coherent uniform group is something. I put both versions here, not meaning to be negative, but because it seems like there is some of it all in it all.

For me, I knew Basic was going to be hard. I prepared for it. I got in great shape, and I could pass the PT test the day I showed up. I think being in shape helped me deal with the mental stress of basic training. Basic Training is a shock to anyone. Unless you've been through it, you really cannot fully comprehend it. You don't get much sleep, there is non-stop shouting (and cursing back in the day), lot's of stress just meeting all of the standards. But I felt it was a great experience. I just never understood why anyone would show up to Army or Marine boot camp out of shape. That's just asking for trouble:)......

I know you might not believe this, but for the most part, if they show up to ship, they're yours, if the recruiter and the MEPS have done a halfway decent job in the screening process (some do, some don't--and the harder it is to get people, the sloppier the job they do). You are always going to lose a few (people on psych meds who didn't admit to it, and then ALL THEIR SHIT gets taken away, including their drugs, when they arrive at boot camp, for example) and you will always have the malingering bastards who thought it was gonna be Club Med or like some stupid movie they saw. Then, when the NACS come back (they do an ENTNAC on you when you enlist, and a better clearance when you ship) you might find that a criminal record that slipped past the first screening causes problems, either for the whole enlistment, or the job the kid wants to do in service.

The mean drill sergeant from back in the day actually faded for awhile, but now he or she is coming back. At one point, it WAS kinda like Club Med, a bit absurd to any of us who went through some massive shit (and I got the full treatment, both enlisted AND officer training--doubly crapped on!). The new method wasn't quite "Go have a 'time out' in the corner, recruit" but it was going that way.

In some branches, all, really, nowadays, in fact, the instructors realize that they only have eight weeks or so to whip those kids into shape, and it's important that the ones who are going to the sandbox have their wits about them. That's why they're getting a bit more intense about it. It's personal. They don't want them coming home in a box.

That's some shitty duty, too--instructor training. I never had the 'pleasure,' and I'm glad of that.

1. We had to scare you all more than you were scaring us. Think about it, you all had us out numbered for starters. We ran o/a 50 eager young space cadets per training flight; those aren't good odds when you're alone in a barracks with a bunch of wound up, nervous undisciplined newbies of which you know absolutely nothing. Well poo you say, AF enlisted women, how bad can that be? Bad enough that one TI spent quality time in the intensive care ward at Wilford Hall Med Cen after six of her trainees beat the ever living crap out of her. So to quote my TI from Day One, "Ladies, we can't make you do a thing. We can make you wish you had." One of three most frightening things I have ever heard. I didn't want to find out how they could.

2. If you can't handle the minor league bs from us, you wouldn't survive Saturday night in some hell hole on the other side of the world. We knew what you're in for and, honestly, we really wanted you to be able to get through it.

With all due respect Sarge, most of the Army Drill Sergeants I had were paratroopers, rangers, etc. These NCO's were NOT afraid of us. As for me, I think AF basic would have been a breese.

Because if you don't get the training or assignments that you desire in writing, the Army will not keep their word.

Many troops get enlistment bonuses too, so that requires a contract.

I just think that if a kid get's to basic training and clearly is not suited for it, they should be able to quit. Yes, there are times in basic training when everyone may want to quit. The Drill Sergeants and Drill Instructors can and do make life miserable for basic trainees and recruits. But those who really want to make it will not quit.

is just a piece of paper that can be rendered null and void if you'd rather just blow it off and go get your MBA. Your last name must be Bush.

Most other jobs don't, and they are an agreement between employer and employee, who gets what also. I don't get why a contract.

If you don't want to sign a contract...don't join. No big deal.

First, it's something that's always been done, and there's not a lot of force behind changing it, so it stays that way. Second, like you said, they want to ensure that their investment in training is paid back. Third, I think not being bound to stay for a certain length of time would be bad for troop cohesion.

Do you honestly think that we could have an effective military if everybody could just walk away when the shooting started?

Why would those in "non-shooting" jobs have to sign a contract then? I am asking because I am honestly curious, not looking for snarky answers or to bash.

When you enlist in the Army, no matter what job you take, you are an infantry Soldier first and foremost. That's why all Army enlistees take basic combat training, regardless of the job they have selected, which could indeed be an admin job.

The logistics and support people are EVERY BIT as important to the mission as the poor slob with the weapon. How's he gonna get his bullets? Who's gonna sort his mail? Who will cut his orders when his time in the sandbox is done? Who will make his pay entries for him? Who will patch him up and send him to a major military medical facility when he gets blown to shit? Who will stuff him in a box after cleaning him up so his family can view his remains?

The chain is only as strong as the weakest link. Pity the weakest link is at the top of the chain, nowadays.

Every Soldier is critical, even the supply types. All need to be Soldiers first, and they are.

you never know if and when you may be shot at. The days of a front line and a 'safe' rear echelon are long gone.

They didn't want people to be able to "quit" any at time they Service's needs displeased the individual service member, you know "Smith charge that pillbox!", Smith "I quit".

There is a certain rationale to that, there were plenty of times I had much, much, better things to do than whatever it was that they had in mind for me. I would have resigned in a Dallas minute if I could of, heck, the entire unit would have, on many a day.

There were times when we were really getting dogged by the stress monsters in the brown smokey the bear hats when I'm sure that we all wished we could go home! Most of us really wanted to graduate, so we hung tough.

I think the first reason is the very large commitment of time and money to train a recruit into a soldier, especially if he was to be a specialist as so many are today.

My company does not have a time commitment but it does make you sign a contract that if you leave within 1-2 years (can't remember which) you have to pay the company back for its training costs which is about $ 35,000.

The second reason is planning. The armed forces has so many specialties which need to be filled and also so many geographic commitments that they wouldn't have any way of planning and keeping all those spots filled if they didn't have some idea of how long people would be there.

Just to give an example, imagine if a person could join the airforce, get trained for three years as a pilot, and then say see ya, I'm going to work for industry.

A real world example of this was the Confederate Army at Sharpsburg. Lee invaded Maryland thinking he had 45-50,000 men. Somewhere along the ine he got to the battle with around 30,000-35,000. What happened to the other 15,000 men? They kind of just got lost on the march. At that point in the war, most Confederate soldiers were volunteers. Many whole units decided not to enter Maryland as they had signed on to protect Virginia, not invade Maryland. So soldiers went home after the Second Manassas victory thinking they'd done their duty, they stayed in Virginia, or they just straggled along the way. Anyway, they were sorely missed when McClellan found Lee's orders and went after him with more than twice his number. The battle was a draw, but was the deadliest day in US military history.

most of the time the majority of soldiers do not see battle. I can see why they would need a contract to stay in, be able to plan, etc. Thank you for your response, appreciate it.

not possible.

Pregnancy, humanitarian reasons (sole support of a disable/critical ill parent or sib), medical, inadaptability (anything from failure to maintain proficiency in career field to fear of flying - AF), dependent support - currently if a first term enlisted can not secure a legal guardian for his/her minor child, s/he will be discharge and, of course, the old standby, getting your ass in the UCMJ sling once too often. Back in the day, a third of the gang didn't make it to the end of their hitch.

I remember when I was in Infantry Training in the Marine Crotch. They loaded a couple of machine-guns with tracers and showed us what they could do by firing them across an open field.

Then the idiots showed us how to attack a machine-gun bunker across an open field. Some guys went around to one side to flank it, and the rest of us stood up and WALKED straight at the bunker while shooting our trusty M1s from the hip. Brilliant!

I decided right then and there, if any dumbass sergeant ever told me to do something so stupid, we were going to have a fight..and I had a gun..seing as how I couldn't quit.

(ed for a spelling error) I've not been in the military except a failed trial at the Ntl Guard 25 yrs ago. Thank you for talking about this with me. Interesting to hear your viewpoints and kudos for politeness! thanks.