What do you think about the army calling this retired soldier back into service?

Question

The U.S. military recently called a man back into duty after being retired from the army for two years. During those two years he has been attending college and working towards a degree in law. Recently he received a letter from the army wanting him to go to Iraq (he was high up there in ranks, not for sure what he was though). They are going to court over this and the news said he may be put in jail because of it and lose all of his army benefits.

What do you think about something like this? Do you think the army should be allowed to call you back into service after you have been retired?

Thanks for the answers.

I know it is legal. But, do you think it should be? Do you think they should be allowed to do it?

My source was the local news channel. Well, the channel for Kentucky news...it is a Kentucky man that it is happening to.

I am almost positive it said he was retired. Of course, I could be wrong. I tried to find something on the internet about it. I found this:http://wjz.com/minutes/sixtyminutes_story_184201644.html

It says "semi-retired" soldiers? What does that mean?

I'm only 17 years old and don't know as much about the military as I should. But, I'm trying to learn.

No, he isn't retired "after two years"...he's been retired "for two years". I don't know how long he served in the military..he looked like he was in his 40s.

Answer 1

I got called back after doing my 20 and did 3 years in the Middle East this time around. Any man worth his salt just goes..... you signed the papers and they could call you up 20 years after if they wanted you. This guy you speak of is a dork...... he has some other agenda and is trying to be a poster boy for being rebelious. If he was so high he would know that they are not going to put him on a street corner in Bahgdad. Lots of people are getting called up and for most it is a source of pride. "Honey, my country needs me". A pain? Yes. Speak to a real soldier, not getting info from the TV and then you will know.

Answer 2

i do think it should be legal to recall people back to active duty .
i think that the military has spent a great deal of money on the training of the people while they were in the military and
because a person is able to be retired from the military after a full career and still be less then 65 and like you wrote able to go off to law school and various other things . see they are getting a big break getting to be retired at this younger age.
as far as sending them off to battle that is something that i think a good deal of study should be done on . is a person who is 25 or 30 years older then the other young men really as able to preform the sort of hard physical work that may come in a battle.
sure on a test the man might be able to do all that the army sets as a standard for fitness but is that really the same as running for your life jumping rolling taking a beating just being in the battle i don't think they test people to that degree if they did they would have so many people with broken legs and heart attacks and all manner of injury .
calling the men back to train others or to be behind the lines sure there the years of wisdom will make them better able to do the work. again say a ship sinks two good swimmers in the water one 18 the other 35 who is going to manage to swim the longest gee i wonder.

Answer 3

As the first said it is completely legal, says so in those papers we signed when we joined. The reason why it happens is this: After serving at least 20 years you have more than just some basic knowledge under your belt. In many situations, they need someone of that expertise and if it comes down to a retiree, so be it. The job needs to get done and they don't need to take a chance with someone that maybe can do it, when you have this other retired guy who is guaranteed to do the job right the first time! You might not think it is right, and then you should not think about joining!

Answer 4

It's my guess that this individual in an inactive reservist. If that's the case, the army reserves the right to recall anyone who is physically fit and has not received their final discharge. I believe that if you investigate this a little further, you will find that the individual is not retired, he is simply inactive and has not received his final discharge.

I think it's sad for him to reactivate, but it isn't the first, nor will it be the last time this will happen.

During the Vietnam war, the navy reactivated some WWII battleships because of the tremendous fire power they offered. These ships were taken out of mothballs, unfortunately some WWII veterans needed to be reactivated too, because the modern navy of that era had no personnel that could operate these vessels. So you see, the military can uncover a lot of opportunities to get done what needs to get done.

Answer 5

I looked over the story. He is the situation he serve 4 years on active duty. When you enlist in the military you obligate yourself to 6 total years. So he has 2 years of Ready Reserve. If you retire on a pension from the military you are obligate to 30 years. So it you retire after 20 years active duty, then you have 10 years of retired reserves.

He is obligated to report for duty, if he doesn't he should go to jail.

Answer 6

I;d need to see your source on this. As far as I know, the Army's policy is not to involuntarily recall retirees. But many retirees have volunteered to be recalled.

On the other hand, an officer that leaves service prior to retirement may be entered into the inactive reserve roles. That officer may be recalled until he completes his inactive reserve commitment and resigns his commission.

I currently have 25 years of commissioned service in the Army and do not know of a single RETIRED officer that has been involuntarily recalled to active duty. But that doesn't mean it hasn't been done.

Answer 7

Probably Reserves-bet this guy didn't think he's be called to Iraq:

2,778th to die: Oct. 17, 2006 Army Staff Sgt. Ronald L. Paulsen, 53, of Vancouver, died Oct. 17 in Tarmiya, Iraq after a roadside bomb detonated near his vehicle. Paulsen was assigned to the Army Reserve's 414th Civil Affairs Battalion, Utica, N.Y. He was called up last year after he had served in the active Army for 14 years and left in 1992. He was, at this time, the oldest solider from Washington to die in Iraq. "Ron was a very well-respected, very well-liked guy," said Scott Eave, his former employer at a heavy construction firm in Portland. "He was one of those guys who is a part of this place." His widow, Beverly, who married Paulsen in February, recalled him as "a very loving, caring man.

I think this guy was a little surprised too: DeWayne Browning is one of a small number of Americans uniquely qualified to compare the Vietnam and Iraq conflicts, having served in both as a helicopter pilot.

With George W Bush visiting Vietnam for the first time this week, the recently retired pilot spoke to the BBC News website about his efforts, second time around, to bring some humanity to the horror of war.

Mr Browning got drafted - but not for Vietnam. Ironically, his combat call-up only came in 2004 when he was asked to go to Iraq as a 55-year-old reservist in the California Army National Guard.


In 2004, A 53-year-old Vietnam veteran from western Pennsylvania has been called up for active service with the U.S. military in the Iraq (news - web sites) war, The Tribune Review of Greensburg, Pennsylvania reported on Wednesday.
Paul Dunlap, a sergeant in the Army National Guard, will join an armored division next month as a telecommunications specialist in Kuwait, and expects to be there for at least a year, the newspaper reported.

Dunlap, who has not been in combat since serving as a 19-year-old Marine in Vietnam, could not be reached for comment. He will leave behind his wife Mary, four children and three grandchildren.

This from a soldier in 2006: "I am a Viet Nam vet who spent his 55TH birthday in Ramadi and will be spending my 56TH in Balad in a week. I feel I have a unique slant on this "war".

The true crime here is what we have done to the people of Iraq. Not that I think that Saddam was great for them by any means.

But from what I have seen over the last year is we could not have f**k*d it up any worse than we have if we had tried.

What I fear the most is the way the American public is willing to give up so many Civil Liberties for such a cheap price.

I mean a few thousand lives, and a false sense of security is a shameful price to surrender Habeas Corpus.

The Founding Fathers are turning over in their graves.

Answer 8

This is legal. When someone retires from the military after 20 years, they are subject to recall for up to 10 additional years. You can be subject to recall for up to the date 30 years from your entrance into the military. Those rules are for the enlisted members.

If someone retires as an officer, they are subject to recall their entire life. During World War II the Navy brought back officers that were in their 60's though they were not in combat.

Answer 9

SO, like everyone else said, the ex-Army guy still has to go through boot. An important piece of this is also that they will be reduced to PFC (E-2) when that happens, regardless of their Army rank. If they are the company honorman out of boot, they can graduate as a LCpl, but either way, the drop in rank and pay would still be noticed.

Answer 10

Yes he should go back. It is part of being retired from the military. When you retire from any branch of the military you are obligated to give 30 years of service, active and or retired reserves. He should report for duty or go to jail.