-- Luke
----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Dawson" <mdawson at pdx.edu> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2004 8:25 PM Subject: RE: [lbo-talk] re-enlist, or it's Iraq for you!
> Well, what do people think they're signing up for, a picnic? I fully
> understand the class basis of the military, but it is still optional.
This
> is a small sub-scandal, at best.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
> On Behalf Of Doug Henwood
> Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2004 4:22 PM
> To: lbo-talk
> Subject: [lbo-talk] re-enlist, or it's Iraq for you!
>
> Rocky Mountain News - September 16, 2004
>
> GIs claim threat by Army
>
> Soldiers say they were told to re-enlist or face deployment to Iraq
>
> By Dick Foster
>
> COLORADO SPRINGS - Soldiers from a Fort Carson combat unit say they
> have been issued an ultimatum - re-enlist for three more years or be
> transferred to other units expected to deploy to Iraq.
>
> Hundreds of soldiers from the 3rd Brigade Combat Team were presented
> with that message and a re-enlistment form in a series of assemblies
> last Thursday, said two soldiers who spoke on condition of anonymity.
>
> The effort is part of a restructuring of the Army into smaller, more
> flexible forces that can deploy rapidly around the world.
>
> A Fort Carson spokesman confirmed the re-enlistment drive is under
> way and one of the soldiers provided the form to the Rocky Mountain
> News. An Army spokesmen denied, however, that soldiers who don't
> re-enlist with the brigade were threatened.
>
> The form, if signed, would bind the soldier to the 3rd Brigade until
> Dec. 31, 2007. The two soldiers said they were told that those who
> did not sign would be transferred out of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team.
>
> "They said if you refuse to re-enlist with the 3rd Brigade, we'll
> send you down to the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, which is going to
> Iraq for a year, and you can stay with them, or we'll send you to
> Korea, or to Fort Riley (in Kansas) where they're going to Iraq,"
> said one of the soldiers, a sergeant.
>
> The second soldier, an enlisted man who was interviewed separately,
> essentially echoed that view.
>
> "They told us if we don't re-enlist, then we'd have to be reassigned.
> And where we're most needed is in units that are going back to Iraq
> in the next couple of months. So if you think you're getting out,
> you're not," he said.
>
> The brigade's presentation outraged many soldiers who are close to
> fulfilling their obligation and are looking forward to civilian life,
> the sergeant said.
>
> "We have a whole platoon who refuses to sign," he said.
>
> A Fort Carson spokesman said Wednesday that 3rd Brigade recruitment
> officers denied threatening the soldiers with Iraq duty.
>
> "I can only tell you what the retention officers told us: The
> soldiers were not being told they will go to Iraq, but they may go to
> Iraq," said the spokesman, who gave that explanation before being
> told later to direct all inquiries to the Pentagon.
>
> Sending soldiers to Iraq with less than one year of their enlistment
> remaining "would not be taken lightly," Lt. Col. Gerard Healy said
> from the Pentagon Wednesday.
>
> "We realize that we deal with people and with families, and that's
> got to be a factor," he said.
>
> "There's probably a lot of places on post where they could put those
> folks (who don't re-enlist) until their time expires. But I don't
> want to rule out the possibility that they could go to a unit that
> might deploy," said Healy.
>
> Under current Army practice, members of Iraq-bound units are
> "stop-lossed," meaning they could be retained in the unit for an
> entire year in Iraq, even if their active-duty enlistment expires.
>
> A recruiter told the sergeant that the Army would keep them "as long
> as they needed us."
>
> Extending a soldier's active duty is within Army authority, since the
> enlistment contract carries an eight-year obligation, even if a
> soldier signs for only three or four years of active duty.
>
> The 3rd Brigade recruiting effort is part of the Army's plan to
> restructure large divisions of more than 10,000 soldiers into
> smaller, more flexible, more numerous brigade- sized "Units of
> Action" of about 3,500 soldiers each.
>
> The Army envisions building each unit into a cohesive whole and
> staffing them with soldiers who will stay with the unit for longer
> periods of time, said John Pike, head of the defense analysis think
> tank Global Security.
>
> "They want these units to fight together and train together. They're
> basically trying to keep these brigades together throughout training
> and deployment, so I can understand why they would want to shed
> anybody who was not going to be there for the whole cycle," Pike said.
>
> But some soldiers presented with the re-enlistment message last week
> believe they've already done their duty and should not be penalized
> for choosing to leave. They deployed to Iraq for a year with the 3rd
> Brigade last April.
>
> "I don't want to go back to Iraq," said the sergeant. "I went through
> a lot of things for the Army that weren't necessary and were risky.
> Iraq has changed a lot of people."
>
> The enlisted soldier said the recruiters' message left him troubled,
> unable to sleep and "filled with dread."
>
> "For me, it wasn't about going back to Iraq. It's just the fact that
> I'm ready to get out of the Army," he said.
>
> ---
>
> Soldiers' choice at Fort Carson
>
> WHAT THE FORM SAID
>
> "Elect not to extend or re-enlist and understand that the soldier
> will be reassigned IAW (in accordance with) the needs of the Army by
> Department of the Army HRC (Human Resources Command) . . . or Fort
> Carson G1 (Personnel Office)."
>
> WHAT IT MEANS
>
> - Soldiers who sign the letter are bound to the 3rd Brigade Combat
> Team until Dec. 31, 2007.
>
> - Soldiers who do not sign the letter might be transferred out of the
> brigade and possibly to Iraq.
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>