National Guard having trouble recruiting

[Stravo]

Strained Army National Guard having tough time recruiting

Tue Jul 20, 6:39 AM ET Add Top Stories - USATODAY.com to My Yahoo!


By Dave Moniz, USA TODAY

Pentagon (news - web sites) and National Guard figures show that the 350,000-member Army National Guard is having increasing difficulty recruiting soldiers. It also continues to lag behind the other services in the quality of enlistees as measured by military aptitude tests.


Signs of trouble:


• The Army Guard's total number of soldiers - "end strength" in military terminology - is 343,846, more than 6,000 below its target of 350,000. End strength has been declining since January. Guard officials say they can recover by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.


• The Army Guard is having trouble recruiting new soldiers. At the end of May, the most recent figures available, it was more than 5,400 recruits short. That's about 14% below its goal of 37,486 recruits by May 31.


• Only 58% of Army Guard recruits this year have achieved "quality recruit" scores on military aptitude tests, compared with 72% for the Army Reserve and 80% for the Air National Guard. The Pentagon's target for quality recruits is 60% for enlistees. The last time the Army Guard met that was in 2001.


• The Pentagon recently activated more than 5,600 members of the Army's Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), in part to fill gaps in the Army Guard. The IRR is a rarely used group of soldiers who have finished their voluntary active-duty tours.


Personnel experts and some members of Congress had predicted problems would surface this year. The Army National Guard and Army Reserve make up nearly 40% of the 141,000 U.S. troops in Iraq (news - web sites). Overall, 131,000 Army Guard and Reserve soldiers are on active duty in the United States and overseas, in most cases for 15 to 18 months. Full-time soldiers' foreign deployments typically are one year.


"We can't continue like this," says Paul Monroe, a retired commander of the California National Guard. He says recruiting will get harder as long as the National Guard or Army Reserve are called up for full-time duty as frequently as they have been since 9/11.


The Army Guard and Reserve were established as part-time forces. Unlike the Army Reserve, a federal force, the Guard also has a state role and is controlled in peacetime by governors.


Lt. Col. Mike Jones, a senior recruiting officer, says that although the Army Guard is behind its recruiting target, "we are hopeful we will make our goal." Jones says that the summer months are typically the best for recruiting and that Guard recruiters "don't ever consider defeat" a possibility.


The Army National Guard's retention rate - the rate at which soldiers choose to remain in the service - is above expected levels this year, but there are signs that repeated call-ups could begin affecting it. Monroe says that surveys of California Guard troops called up for extended duty showed earlier this year that as many as half of those who were mobilized plan to leave the Guard at the earliest opportunity.


The active-duty Army and Army Reserve are on track to meet their 2004 recruiting goals. Experts say it's easier for the active-duty Army to recruit because it offers more benefits.

[Stormbringer]

Not suprising. It seems from the number of deserters lately (and a number of people I know that are part of the National Guard) that a whole lot of Guard Personel signed up with the impression that they'd never had to do anything but play weekend warrior. Since September 11th they've found out differently and people aren't looking at it as playing soldier anymore.

[The Kernel]

The manpower shortages that the US military is experiencing is only going to get worse the longer the Iraq occupation drags on. No one wants to join up only to be sent to a desert halfway across the world.

[Tsyroc]

No fucking surprise at all.

Going by the National Guard advertisements I would like to join. I think being part of an organization that helps during disasters and national emergencies would be cool. Plus, my time in the Navy would transfer in one form or another.

Unfortunately, the Guard and the Army Reserve are the same thing now so that means invading countries like Iraq and Afghanistan are now essentially the same as "national emergencies". I have real probelms with how the government has been using the guard lately, but it started with GWI.

In my opinion the reserves/guard should not be used as a cheep way to keep a larger military than what the feds want to pay for. It should be rare that they are called up and it better be for a unforseen situation. Not some, "Well we don't really have enough guys to invade and hold these two countries so lets activate a bunch of the reserves so we can do it anyway."

[Stormbringer]

The manpower shortages that the US military is experiencing is only going to get worse the longer the Iraq occupation drags on. No one wants to join up only to be sent to a desert halfway across the world.

These days it's more like no one wants to join and actually do anything. Recruitment's been done for the last decade or so. And a lot of it has been that the US military has been active in things like peace keeping and now whatever the hell you want to call this. This isn't exactly something new.

[Chardok]

Strained Army National Guard having tough time recruiting

Tue Jul 20, 6:39 AM ET Add Top Stories - USATODAY.com to My Yahoo!


By Dave Moniz, USA TODAY

I'll start with "Duh"

Pentagon (news - web sites) and National Guard figures show that the 350,000-member Army National Guard is having increasing difficulty recruiting soldiers. It also continues to lag behind the other services in the quality of enlistees as measured by military aptitude tests.

Because only stupid people sign up for the guard.

Signs of trouble:


• The Army Guard's total number of soldiers - "end strength" in military terminology - is 343,846, more than 6,000 below its target of 350,000. End strength has been declining since January. Guard officials say they can recover by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.

Wonder why that is? Try this:

One weekend a month, My ass.
two weeks a year, my ass.

• The Army Guard is having trouble recruiting new soldiers. At the end of May, the most recent figures available, it was more than 5,400 recruits short. That's about 14% below its goal of 37,486 recruits by May 31.

See above.

• Only 58% of Army Guard recruits this year have achieved "quality recruit" scores on military aptitude tests, compared with 72% for the Army Reserve and 80% for the Air National Guard. The Pentagon's target for quality recruits is 60% for enlistees. The last time the Army Guard met that was in 2001.

See above

• The Pentagon recently activated more than 5,600 members of the Army's Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), in part to fill gaps in the Army Guard. The IRR is a rarely used group of soldiers who have finished their voluntary active-duty tours.

ALL VOLUNTEER FORCE, YO! My ass. They were snowed.

Personnel experts and some members of Congress had predicted problems would surface this year. The Army National Guard and Army Reserve make up nearly 40% of the 141,000 U.S. troops in Iraq (news - web sites). Overall, 131,000 Army Guard and Reserve soldiers are on active duty in the United States and overseas, in most cases for 15 to 18 months. Full-time soldiers' foreign deployments typically are one year.

it's fucking horseshit that the guard is even IN Iraq, IMHO. The guard should be just that, the NATIONAL guard. not INTERNATIONAL Mopper-uppers.


more tomorrow.

Fixed your quotes. It was extremely distracting. -Beowulf

[Tsyroc]

it's fucking horseshit that the guard is even IN Iraq, IMHO. The guard should be just that, the NATIONAL guard. not INTERNATIONAL Mopper-uppers.

My thoughts exactly. If the country isn't in a fight for it's life (ie under threat of invasion) the guard should not be heavilly involved in military operations.

In the long run it's not good for the military to rely on "part-timers" so heavilly either. However well trained and drilled the reservist are I don't see how they could be as prepared as the active duty personel. At least I hope the active duty people are getting more training than the guard is.

I'm waiting to see if the reserves are going to have problems getting people to be MPs and Medics. The two areas that seem to get called up en mass ever time something happens.

[consequences]

I'm waiting to see if the reserves are going to have problems getting people to be MPs and Medics. The two areas that seem to get called up en mass ever time something happens.

*cough* Transportation *cough*

[Trytostaydead]

There was an interesting History Channel show on the other night, all about Soldiers of Fortune. They basically summed up the show by proclaiming what other news outlets did earlier on in the Iraq campaign, that the American has essentially transformed itself into a mercenary army. And even our whole outlook on those security companies has drastically changed from distrust to a heavy reliance.

I wonder if this continues for another decade or so, what will be the net outcome? Already we're seeing some bad examples of private contractors run amok, and if you'll forgive me.. this is all seemingly too Machiavellian.

[Lonestar]

National Guard having trouble recruiting

Point....


Counterpoint

New York Times
July 20, 2004

Don't Dumb Down The Military

By Nathaniel Fick

WASHINGTON — I went to war as a believer in the citizen-soldier. My college study of the classics idealized Greeks who put down their plows for swords, returning to their fields at the end of the war. As a Marine officer in Afghanistan and Iraq, however, I learned that the victors on today's battlefields are long-term, professional soldiers. Thus the increasing calls for reinstating the draft - and the bills now before Congress that would do so - are well intentioned but misguided. Imposing a draft on the military I served in would harm it grievously for years.

I led platoons of volunteers. In Afghanistan, my marines slept each night in holes they hacked from the rocky ground. They carried hundred-pound packs in addition to their fears of minefields and ambushes, their homesickness, loneliness and exhaustion. The most junior did it for $964.80 per month. They didn't complain, and I never wrestled with discipline problems. Each and every marine wanted to be there. If anyone hadn't, he would have been a drain on the platoon and a liability in combat.

In Iraq, I commanded a reconnaissance platoon, the Marines' special operations force. Many of my enlisted marines were college-educated; some had been to graduate school. All had volunteered once for the Marines, again for the infantry, and a third time for recon. They were proud to serve as part of an elite unit. Like most demanding professionals, they were their own harshest critics, intolerant of their peers whose performance fell short.

The dumb grunt is an anachronism. He has been replaced by the strategic corporal. Immense firepower and improved technology have pushed decision-making with national consequences down to individual enlisted men. Modern warfare requires that even the most junior infantryman master a wide array of technical and tactical skills.

Honing these skills to reflex, a prerequisite for survival in combat, takes time - a year of formal training and another year of on-the-job experience were generally needed to transform my young marines into competent warriors. The Marine Corps demands four-year active enlistments because it takes that long to train troops and ensure those training dollars are put to use in the field. One- or two-year terms, the longest that would be likely under conscription, would simply not allow for this comprehensive training.

Some supporters of the draft argue that America's wars are being fought primarily by minorities from poor families who enlisted in the economic equivalent of a Hail Mary pass. They insist that the sacrifices of citizenship be shared by all Americans. The sentiment is correct, but the outrage is misplaced. There is no cannon-fodder underclass in the military. In fact, front-line combat troops are a near-perfect reflection of American male society.

Yes, some minority men and women enlist for lack of other options, but they tend to concentrate in support jobs where they can learn marketable skills like driving trucks or fixing jets, not throwing grenades and setting up interlocking fields of machine gun fire. African-Americans, who comprise nearly 13 percent of the general population, are overrepresented in the military at more than 19 percent - but they account for only 10.6 percent of infantry soldiers, the group that suffers most in combat. Hispanics, who make up 13.3 percent of the American population, are underrepresented at only 11 percent of those in uniform.

The men in my infantry platoons came from virtually every part of the socio-economic spectrum. There were prep-school graduates and first-generation immigrants, blacks and whites, Muslims and Jews, Democrats and Republicans. They were more diverse than my class at Dartmouth, and far more willing to act on their principles.

The second argument most often advanced for a renewed draft is that the military is too small to meet its commitments. Absolutely true. But the armed forces are stretched thin not from a lack of volunteers but because Congress and the Pentagon are not willing to spend the money to expand the force. Each of the services met or exceeded its recruiting goals in 2003, and the numbers have increased across the board so far this year. Even the Army National Guard, often cited as the abused beast of burden in Iraq, has seen re-enlistments soar past its goal, 65 percent, to 141 percent (the figure is greater than 100 because many guardsmen are re-enlisting early).

Expanding the military to meet additional responsibilities is a matter of structural change: if we build it, they will come. And build it we must. Many of my marines are already on their third combat deployment in the global war on terrorism; they will need replacing. Increasing the size of the active-duty military would lighten the burden on every soldier, sailor, airman and marine. Paradoxically, a larger military becomes more sustainable than a smaller one: fewer combat deployments improves service members' quality of life and contributes to higher rates of enlistment and retention. For now, expanding the volunteer force would give us a larger military without the inherent liabilities of conscription.

And while draft supporters insist we have learned the lessons of Vietnam and can create a fair system this time around, even an equitable draft would lower the standards for enlistees. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was chastised for saying Vietnam-era draftees added no value to the armed forces. But his error was semantic; the statement was true of the system, if not of the patriotic and capable individuals who served.

The current volunteer force rejects applicants who score poorly on its entrance aptitude exam, disclose a history of significant drug use or suffer from any of a number of orthopedic or chronic injuries. Face it: any unwilling draftee could easily find a way to fail any of these tests. The military, then, would be left either to abandon its standards and accept all comers, or to remain true to them and allow the draft to become volunteerism by another name. Stripped of its volunteer ideology, but still unable to compel service from dissenters, the military would end up weaker and less representative than the volunteer force - the very opposite of the draft's intended goals.

Renewing the draft would be a blow against the men and women in uniform, a dumbing down of the institution they serve. The United States military exists to win battles, not to test social policy. Enlarging the volunteer force would show our soldiers that Americans recognize their hardship and are willing to pay the bill to help them better protect the nation. My view of the citizen-soldier was altered, but not destroyed, in combat. We cannot all pick up the sword, nor should we be forced to - but we owe our support to those who do.

Nathaniel Fick, a former Marine captain, is writing a memoir of his military training and combat experience.

An Opinion column, so take from it what you will.

[HemlockGrey]

The increased reliance upon part-timers and mercenaries is rather distressing, but that's what happens when you blunder willy-nilly into inescapable attrition wars while at the same time cutting pay and benefits for active duty soldiers.

[Beowulf]

The increased reliance upon part-timers and mercenaries is rather distressing, but that's what happens when you blunder willy-nilly into inescapable attrition wars while at the same time cutting pay and benefits for active duty soldiers.

*cough*

Each of the services met or exceeded its recruiting goals in 2003, and the numbers have increased across the board so far this year.

And you know, I could have sworn I'm getting a raise in January, in addition to the raise I got today...

[HemlockGrey]

I had heard that veteran benefits were being cut, but whatever.

[Death from the Sea]

I had heard that veteran benefits were being cut, but whatever.

that comes from GW wanting to close some Veteran Hospitals, but the ones he wants to close are ones that have few veterans using them. In addition to closing the older less used and run down hospitals he (GW) wants to open some new ones with better facilities. All the media focuses on is the negative though, and so all you hear is "GW is cutting veterans benefits" when really it is the opposite.

[Uraniun235]

One of my old history teachers, retired twice (once from the Army, once from education - she does tutoring now) with a full head of gray-white hair, walked into the tech. department last week and told us the Army had sent her a letter asking if she'd please consider re-activating for a while?

They wanted her either in

Kuwait
Iraq
Afghanistan
That island dealy that Central Command is stationed in
...or South America

I couldn't believe it at first. She has to be at least 65 years old and they want her back in? Granted, she's a staff officer, so it's not like she has to be packing an M-16 through the streets of Baghdad, but still!

She said she was considering it though, so long as it was only for a half-year deployment and as long as the fine print specifically said so many days and absolutely no more.