as part of its 'stop loss' policy now in effect?
Section C, Para 9, subpara c states: In the event of war, my enlistment in the Armed Forces continues until six (6) months after the war ends, unless my enlistment is ended sooner by the President of the United States.
2007-10-18 11:21:58 · 10 answers · asked by !truth! 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Since that is stated in the contract, technically anyone now on active duty may be retain until 6 months after the Iraq war is ended.
2007-10-18 11:27:49 · update #1
If the Army is using stop loss why then are they having to recruit?
2007-10-18 11:31:29 · update #2
If we are technically not at war, why then is the war in Iraq always mentioned?
2007-10-18 11:33:42 · update #3
Will somebody else answer this question, all the ones submitted are any worth as best answer.
2007-10-19 10:55:44 · update #4
It is enforced, the fact is, we are no longer legally at war with any particular nation, so guys that have fulfilled their contract are being allowed to leave the military.
2007-10-18 11:25:16 · answer #1 · answered by essentiallysolo 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Legally declared wars don't happen anymore, not since the War Powers Act. Congress just authorizes the President to use force in enforcing resolutions (ours or UN).
However, the militay does have the option of invoking that clause if they wish. They do use stop-loss to keep units stable right before & during deployments, but not to cover enlistment shortages. The problem with keeping everyone on for the duration is people get used up, and no one would join under those conditions.
If you've been watching the news on enlistment numbers, the Army & Marines are making their targets. The Air Force, Navy, & Coast Guard routinely turn people away. And, that's while the Army is expanding pretty rapidly so they are recruiting a lot more people than are getting out. And, retention of people reenlisting is actually quite good. In other words, they don't need to use that clause and it'd be counter-productive if they did.
2007-10-18 11:46:40 · answer #2 · answered by djack 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Army has not since the beginning stop lossed the entire force, if they had I would not have retired. Sorry but forgot another part of the contract. "For the needs of the Army" That is the most important part of your contract and the first part that soldiers forget first when trying to get out of something.
2007-10-18 11:38:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
They do, when necessary. That clause was implemented in Desert Storm (the first gulf war) and several times during the current war. It can be applied to the services en masse, or selectively to specific branches, specialties, etc -- all depends on the needs of the service.
2007-10-18 11:25:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Army has a huge revolving door as fast as someone gets out someone advances and someone new joins etc... now critical skill MOS you can be called back when ever like SF and pilots and especially linguist now a days
2007-10-18 14:46:36 · answer #5 · answered by ZOO~BAT 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Were not technically at war. Except with North Korea and thats been going on for like 50 years now so whatever lol
2007-10-18 11:27:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
That is the part of the contract they are using for stop loss.
2007-10-18 11:24:52 · answer #7 · answered by davidmi711 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is true, but we are not anywhere near close to going to those lengths to keep people. We don't need to.
2007-10-18 11:31:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We're not in a declared war.
MSgt, USAF (Ret)
USAF Judge Advocate General's Corps
2007-10-18 11:24:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
because then you would never get anyone to do a dam thing. stop loss is a horrible thing.
2007-10-18 11:26:23 · answer #10 · answered by kevin a 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋