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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve dietrich who wrote (183168)	3/8/2006 12:55:10 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Shouldn't be necessary to call up the guard, unless there's a temporary emergency. Steve, this is incorrect. The Army (and congress) took the deliberate step back in the '80s to move their combat support elements to the Reserves and National Guard. If you'll recall, Desert Storm required the call up of tens of thousands of reservists in order to support the Active Duty (AD) combat units who did most of the fighting. I don't recall the percentages, but I believe it's close to around 50% mix between AD and Reservist.. But it's also one reason Congress voted for it. Save money, and make sure that when the military is given a mission, they would need the national political support because it would require calling up the reserves. Works great, except when we're in a peace-keeping/counter-insurgency mode and there is a stretch on AD forces rotating every other year to serve in Iraq. Btw, I don't support a draft.. I support mandatory service. Hawk