Soldiers re-enlist beyond U.S. goal (bonuses range from 1k to 150k)

[sabra]

<<SNIP>>
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-07-17-soldiers-re-enlist_x.htm

Soldiers re-enlist beyond U.S. goal
By Dave Moniz, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Soldiers are re-enlisting at rates ahead of the Army's targets, even as overall recruiting is suffering after two years of the Iraq war.

The high re-enlistment rates would make up about one-third of the Army's projected 12,000-troop shortfall in recruiting, although the re-enlistments won't address some key personnel vacancies, such as military police and bomb-disposal experts.

Army officials attribute the strong re-enlistment rates to unprecedented cash bonuses and a renewed sense of purpose in fighting terrorism. Some of the record bonuses are tax-free if soldiers re-enlist while in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Re-enlistment bonuses range from as little as $1,000 to as much as $150,000, depending on the type of job and length of re-enlistment. The $150,000 bonuses are offered only to senior special operations commandos who agree to stay in the military for up to six more years. The average bonus is $10,000, said Col. Debbra Head, who monitors Army retention at the Pentagon.

<</SNIP>>

[democracyindanger]

1. They can either reenlist and get a bonus

or not reenlist, get stop-lossed, and get stuck in the military for more years without the bonus.

[Xipe Totec]

2. Bingo! n/t

[Canuckistanian]

4. Enlightened Self-Interest...

It's the American Way.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[thebigidea]

8. as opposed to the elites who sent them to die in the first place

we know who the fucking elites are, and they aren't the sweaty bastards out with signs on street corners, locked out of fundraisers for W held blocks away.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[thebigidea]

13. I'm not your search function

and i'm not about to do the bidding of somebody who calls left wing activists "elites" - we do know who else does that, eh?

donate some money and do it yourself. But I somehow doubt you'll bother.

[leesa]

14. What the hell are you talking about?

[Catch22Dem]

21. Yes

I obviously won't divulge any names because it's not my place to do so, but I just recently carried on a conversation via private message with a DUer who had decided to join the Air Force and wanted to ask questions about it with someone who had been through it. As someone who spent 8 years in the Air Force, I was happy to answer those questions for him.

[democracyindanger]

22. It must suck not having any friends.

[rocktivity]

29. Victim blaming above and beyond the call of duty

:headbang:
rocknation

[saigon68]

3. Behavior similar to the Hessians at Trenton.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Catch22Dem]

9. Wow, I've seen "out of line" posts before, but this one takes the cake

What exactly did Siagon68 do to deserve the attack?

[sabra]

11. that was weird...

I see this thread taking a turn for the worst...

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Catch22Dem]

19. You did the exact same thing in another thread

You attempted an air of authority regarding the first Continental Congress just tonight, so if you're not the pot calling the kettle black, what the fuck are you?

Personally, I'd like to have you around for a while and see what you have to say, but attacks on people like Siagon68 are certainly out of order. You didn't call anyone out, you attacked, and that ain't cool.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Catch22Dem]

23. And once again, Siagon68 did nothing different.

And no need to get on his ass for his handle. You know, believe it or not, there are a lot of people who are proud to have served their country. It doesn't matter if it was 5 years ago like me, 35 like Siagon68, or 60 years ago in WWII. I certainly don't judge them for it.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saigon68]

25. ADIOS

Vaya Con Dios

[TahitiNut]

33. More like "Vaya Con Diablo," bro.

:evilgrin: Good riddance to human garbage.

[saigon68]

34. LOL

[bluestateguy]

28. Thanks Saxby

n/t

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Inland]

24. Nothing like blaming the soldiers on the ground for a war's failure

And no offense, but vietnam service is a great education in how to lose a war to poorly armed, highly motivated insurgents. That's why Vietnam vets can spot the Iraq loss coming.

But you tell us who's military advice you are taking. In the ten minutes before you are tombstoned. We're all ears to know which armchair general you think is da bomb.

[Barrett808]

26. Don't feed the trolls, folks. n/t

[bluestateguy]

27. This guy is either a troll or very ignorant person, or both

Actually, I do take what Saigon68 has to say very seriously, much more seriously than a bunch of pussy-assed chickenhawks who had "other priorities" in that war, but now send young men off to fight in a war that the US should not be fighting in.

If you aren't a troll, then you have a lot to learn about life you anti-American piece of shit.

[bluestateguy]

5. "And the people who keep the statistics in the federal government say so!"

Hm hm.

[Tommymac]

16. This article is SPIN!!!!!

Read the fine print - check out these excerpts from the middle of the article:

From Oct. 1 through June, the Army had re-enlisted 53,120 soldiers, 6% ahead of its goal of about 50,000 for that period. At that pace, the Army would finish the year 3,850 troops ahead of its target of 64,162.

64162 + 3850=68012 68012/64162=1.060004364 x 100 = 106.0004364%

Re-enlistment rates the past three years have been at least 6% above the service's goals for the 500,000-member active Army.

I guess 6.0004364% is technically above 6%.

The reup rate is beyond the goal...but it has been the same for the last 3 years...no new news here.

[bushisanidiot]

37. Ah, so they lowered their goal in order to be able to say they

"surpassed" their goal.

bunch of lying idiots..

[LiberalFighter]

41. Actually don't think it was quite that.... they focused on the reenlisted

and buried the new recruitment numbers. That way it look like they are doing a good job.

[LiberalFighter]

42. Recruiting new soldiers should be the real story

By contrast, the Army through June was about 15% behind its goal of recruiting 80,000 soldiers by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year. The Army has said it faces the roughest recruiting climate since the start of the all-volunteer military in 1973.

[ConcernedCanuk]

30. Bribing the citizens to Kill for the Oil Barons . .

.
.
.

Things haven't changed much in the last 200 years down there,

Now have they? :shrug:

[Dover]

31. "...ahead of the Army's targets". What number would that target be?

ONE?! Now there's an easy number to beat.

[lebkuchen]

32. The reenlistment rate for the army last fiscal year was down 12%

If the current information is true, the bonuses must be making an impact.

[Tommymac]

39. But that is not what the article says...

It says that the re-up rate for the last 3 years has been 6% above the targeted goal. And it is projected to be the same this year....no change.

NO CHANGE. Not better or worse. Status quo.

The article is headlined to make it seem the Army is doing better than expected...yet the numbers tell a different story. No Change. Spin.

On Edit: Don't confuse the re-up numbers with the new recruitment numbers - they are two different things. I think the new recruit rate is down about 12%....

[lebkuchen]

43. I know the difference between reup and recruitment

These are the reup numbers Army-wide since Bush has been in office, as provided to a Stripes reporter by the Pentagon:

FY Total separation population Total eligible to reenlist Total reenlisted % of eligible who reenlisted


04 100,996 85,033 53,729 63.2%
03 79,306 66,513 49,926 75.1%
02 92,208 78,439 56,788 72.4%
01 110,967 95,711 62,178 65.0%

The reup rate may be 6% of its targeted goal, but note that Lt. Gen. Steven Blum, Chief of the National Guard, called targeted goals "artificial and "meaningless."

Instead, he said, “The goal that you really want to keep your eye on is my authorized end strength” of 350,000 soldiers, “and my assigned strength,” which is currently about 330,000 troops.

http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=29520&archive=true

************
The "end strength" and "assigned strength," however, are accumulations of the monthly targeted goal, so it remains a mystery how those monthly goals can be so cavalierly dismissed by Blum, who is short 20,000 boots-on-the-ground.

[billyoc]

35. I believe this has more to do with threats

than bonuses. Soldiers have been threatened with stop-loss if they don't reup, but told they'll have a chance of leaving Iraq for a little while if they do.

[bushisanidiot]

36. The question is whether or not the soldiers' families know when they

re-enlist, since the soldiers are still on the field, fighting.

the used car salesmen have moved into the warzone to recruit.. who knows what promises they're making to get them to stay.. and who knows whether or not those promises are being kept.. especially when the soldier dies and his/her family is owed thousands of dollars promised by the used car salesmen

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

38. $150K?

Who's getting that kind of money to re-enlist? Junior Grade Officers and senior NCO's make $40-60K per year. Think they're getting two years' pay for re-upping? My guess is that they're paying huge bonuses to people at the rank of colonel or higher. A quick (albiet incomplete) search of Iraq Coalition Casualties doesn't yield anybody at that rank being killed in action (nobody above Major, actually). So those furthest from harm's way are getting the biggest paychecks -- that's certain to send morale through the roof.

[Pinboy]

40. The highest bonuses are for special ops NCO's

Only because they are being offered large salaries to work for companies like Halliburton as civilian security employees. To keep from losing them to U.S. contractors, the military has to offer huge re-up bonuses.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

45. Great...

A bidding war between the two sides of the military-industrial complex. Just what the taxpayers need.

[Supersedeas]

44. Is a 150K signing bonus equivalent to mercenary pay?