Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neeka who wrote (45700)	5/20/2004 9:04:55 AM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793838

Hi m. I agree, I know a good number of Americans will always enlist. The question is will it be enough? Here are the potential pressure points as I view them. Reenlistments are trending down right now. Everytime a soldier is released a slot opens. The door was closed to military retirement for key personnel for nearly two years. It has re-opened and military retirement applications are up. That also creates a slot that must be filled. Involuntary extensions are down. That means we are not getting an extra 6 months or year out of active duty folks. The article suggested we exceeded the goal by enlisting an extra 500 more than needed in the past year. Recruiting Command has just been ordered to enlist an extra 500 per month. Congress is working to increase the ranks by at least 30,000 more. They too will have to be recruited. Enlistment applications and inquiries are trending down. And the historical precedent is for recruiting to drop sharply in the 3rd year of a war. I suggest if all of these factors converge (So far, I see no reason to think they won't.), we are going to have to assist Recruiting Command. The only way I see to do that is with the draft or an exorbitant pay scale as Maurice once suggested. uw

To: Neeka who wrote (45700)	5/20/2004 12:07:21 PM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793838

I just read that ap article in this morning's Coeur d'Alene Post and saw it came with a graph depicting enlistments for the past few years. The words are very positive. The graph tells a different story. The graph shows enlistments definitely started trending down last year. We must also beware of positive statements about meeting quotas. I often question whether the strength of our Armed Forces is determined by available enlistees rather than need. Also, whether our enlistment quotas are set to be makeable rather than to meet the true need.