GreekChat.com Forums  

Go Back   GreekChat.com Forums > General Chat Topics > News & Politics
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

» GC Stats
Members: 329,714
Threads: 115,665
Posts: 2,204,926
Welcome to our newest member, aleispetrovo785
» Online Users: 1,435
0 members and 1,435 guests
No Members online
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-29-2004, 02:06 PM
WCUgirl WCUgirl is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,321
Army to recall former members

.

Last edited by WCUgirl; 11-22-2014 at 12:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-29-2004, 02:34 PM
IowaStatePhiPsi IowaStatePhiPsi is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,624
reading that makes me curious what's happening with H.R. 163 and S. 89 up in Congress.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-29-2004, 02:40 PM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,668
Ask and ye shall receive:

Quote:
Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
reading that makes me curious what's happening with H.R. 163 and S. 89 up in Congress.
H.R.163
Title: To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 1/7/2003) Cosponsors (13)
Related Bills: S.89
Latest Major Action: 2/3/2003 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Executive Comment Requested from DOD.


S.89
Title: A bill to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Hollings, Ernest F. [SC] (introduced 1/7/2003) Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: H.R.163
Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-29-2004, 03:42 PM
sageofages sageofages is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,935
Send a message via AIM to sageofages
Re: Army to recall former members

Quote:
Originally posted by AXiD670
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army is preparing to notify about 5,600 retired and discharged soldiers who are not members of the National Guard or Reserve that they will be involuntarily recalled to active duty for possible service in Iraq or Afghanistan, Army officials said Tuesday.

It marks the first time the Army has called on the Individual Ready Reserve, as this category of reservists is known, in substantial numbers since the 1991 Gulf War.

The move reflects the continued shortage of troops available to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to fight the ongoing war on terrorism as well as Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Lt. Gen. Frank Hagenbeck, the Army's deputy chief of staff for personnel, said earlier this month of the Army's troop strength, "We are stretched but we have what we need."

Pentagon officials have echoed that statement explaining that while the military is reaching deep into its resources, war planners have long had contingency plans such as this for when troops are really needed."

Link
Can we say DRAFT?

sigh
__________________
"Pam" Bäckström, DY '81, WSU, Dayton, OH - Bloomington, IN
Phi Mu - Love.Honor.Truth - 1852 - Imagine.Believe.Achieve - 2013 - 161Years of Wonderful -
Proud to be a member of the Macon Magnolias - Phi Mu + Alpha Delta Pi
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-29-2004, 03:52 PM
PhiPsiRuss PhiPsiRuss is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Listening to a Mariachi band on the N train
Posts: 5,707
Send a message via ICQ to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via AIM to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via Yahoo to PhiPsiRuss
Dear Bill Clinton,

For decades, Amercan defense policy was built on the principle that our military should be able to fight two full scale conflicts at once. This was not just to have a strong defense, but also because if you are engaged on one theater, and not able to handle a second theater, then tyrants will come out of the woodworks and take advantage of this situation.

You decided, in your typical double-speak, to reduce the capability of our military to 1 1/2 theaters of operation. What's 1/2 theater? Anyway, we've had to pray that N. Korea doesn't do anything that's even more stupid than what they usually do, and we've had to turn a blind eye at Iran because we're stretched way too thin to deal with them.

Our military is so spread out, that members of Congress are seriously debating the reinstatement of a draft.

Today, the AP reported, "The Army is preparing to notify about 5,600 retired and discharged soldiers who are not members of the National Guard or Reserve that they will be involuntarily recalled to active duty for possible service in Iraq or Afghanistan, Army officials said Tuesday."

Bill Clinton, this is your legacy.

May you be buried next to Neville Chamberlain when you leave this earth.

Sincerely,

A concerned citizen.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-29-2004, 03:55 PM
IowaStatePhiPsi IowaStatePhiPsi is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,624
I could have sworn big military cuts were started under the reign of Bush I.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-29-2004, 03:58 PM
PhiPsiRuss PhiPsiRuss is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Listening to a Mariachi band on the N train
Posts: 5,707
Send a message via ICQ to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via AIM to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via Yahoo to PhiPsiRuss
Quote:
Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
I could have sworn big military cuts were started under the reign of Bush I.
Not that big. G.H.W. Bush was reducing the military from its full Cold War capability. He had no intention of the level of force reduction that Clinton carried out.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-29-2004, 03:58 PM
IowaStatePhiPsi IowaStatePhiPsi is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,624
well- we had no need. we were in peace before Bush came along with his war mongering.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-29-2004, 04:03 PM
cutiepatootie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
I could have sworn big military cuts were started under the reign of Bush I.


Bush Sr. started downsizing the military and closing bases left and right and now we got Jr. getting us into war with a short supply of military his father cut us down on
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-29-2004, 04:06 PM
PhiPsiRuss PhiPsiRuss is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Listening to a Mariachi band on the N train
Posts: 5,707
Send a message via ICQ to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via AIM to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via Yahoo to PhiPsiRuss
Quote:
Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
well- we had no need. we were in peace before Bush came along with his war mongering.
That's an invalid argument on two points.

Force structure can not be expanded whenever a threat arises, like was possible during WWII. Today, weapons systems often take over a decade to develop and deploy. Reducing force structure was highly irresponsible. Future defense needs can never be known. Clinton condemned America to a reduced defense capabilty.

The war mongering argument is also invalid. The Bush administration did not cause 9-11. It came to us. In the aftermath of that terrible day, the Bush administration decided to go after the root causes of Jihadism. That meant remaking the Middle East, and when that became apparent, Iraq proactively attempted to destabilize the region. Iraq got invaded, and the Iraqi people are finally, after three decades, liberated.

We had a need to invade Iraq. Clinton's policies made doing that more difficult.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-29-2004, 04:06 PM
cutiepatootie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I have a question for someone who can asnwer it

I asked this under the draft thread but now i have a different question

If you have one child and that child is a boy and he somehow gets drafted can he be drafted but not go into combat and be stationed onto base being the only child and being a male solider?

My father told me that but i just needed clarification on that
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-29-2004, 04:08 PM
PhiPsiRuss PhiPsiRuss is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Listening to a Mariachi band on the N train
Posts: 5,707
Send a message via ICQ to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via AIM to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via Yahoo to PhiPsiRuss
Quote:
Originally posted by cutiepatootie
I have a question for someone who can asnwer it

I asked this under the draft thread but now i have a different question

If you have one child and that child is a boy and he somehow gets drafted can he be drafted but not go into combat and be stationed onto base being the only child and being a male solider?

My father told me that but i just needed clarification on that
I'm pretty sure that only children have to serve in combat as well.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-29-2004, 04:09 PM
PhiPsiRuss PhiPsiRuss is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Listening to a Mariachi band on the N train
Posts: 5,707
Send a message via ICQ to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via AIM to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via Yahoo to PhiPsiRuss
Quote:
Originally posted by cutiepatootie
Bush Sr. started downsizing the military and closing bases left and right and now we got Jr. getting us into war with a short supply of military his father cut us down on
Again, G.H.W. Bush did not cut down the military force structure to a 1 1/2 theater capability. Clinton did. Closing bases was not necessarily reducing force structure.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-29-2004, 04:10 PM
IowaStatePhiPsi IowaStatePhiPsi is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,624
Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11
Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia did.
We were correct on 50% of our targets against modern Wahabbism.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-29-2004, 04:12 PM
Rudey Rudey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Taking lessons at Cobra Kai Karate!
Posts: 14,928
Quote:
Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11
Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia did.
We were correct on 50% of our targets against modern Wahabbism.
9-11 isn't some isolated incident. 9-11 fits in well within a region that has birthed quite a few anti-American terrorists.

-Rudey
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.