|
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040423/D824LUNO3.html
FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. (AP) - Despite the shrapnel wounds Staff Sgt. William Pinkley suffered during his tour in Iraq, the 26-year-old is joining other soldiers who are re-enlisting at rates that exceed the retention goals set by the Pentagon.
As of March 31 - halfway through the Army's fiscal year - 28,406 soldiers had signed on for another tour of duty, topping the six-month goal of 28,377. The Army's goal is to re-enlist 56,100 soldiers by the end of September.
Pinkley re-enlisted for three more years, citing the camaraderie and the challenge of a new assignment.
"To come out and work with you guys every day, it's a good feeling," Pinkley, 26, told his 101st Airborne Division buddies during the ceremony earlier this month. His wife, Kimberly, watched with a smile, their toddler in her arms.
"It's a very positive retention picture at this point," said Lt. Col. Franklin Childress, an Army public affairs officer. The Army had nearly a half-million active-duty soldiers.
However, Childress cautioned that factors such as an improved economy and the Pentagon's decision to keep about 20,000 troops in Iraq for longer than a year to help quell the violence could change the picture.
Some contend a poor job market and re-enlistment bonuses worth thousands of dollars are keeping soldiers in the Army. Col. Joseph Anderson, commander of the 101st's 2nd Brigade, said it is more about camaraderie, patriotism and duty.
"They've had a personally rewarding and professionally developing experience," Anderson said. "I think they've formed some bonds that are going to last a lifetime. It tends to make them want to stay."
The only Army division to not meet its goal in the six-month period was the 82nd Airborne Division, whose members have been sent to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq since the Sept. 11 attacks. The division wanted to re-enlist 1,221 soldiers, but got only 1,136.
At Fort Campbell, soldiers from the 101st spent seven months in Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks. The entire division of about 20,000 soldiers was sent to Iraq last year for major combat, and the last planeload returned home in March. A grueling year in Iraq claimed the lives of 61 Fort Campbell soldiers, and hundreds more were wounded.
In the six-month period ending March 31, the 101st topped its goal of re-enlisting 1,591. It got 1,737 to sign up for another tour of duty.
Fort Campbell leaders said their numbers debunk the theory that yearlong combat-zone assignments - not typically used since Vietnam - and the casualties in Iraq would discourage soldiers from re-enlisting.
Shelley MacDermid, co-director of the Military Family Research Institute at Purdue University, said it is too early to know what effect the war in Iraq will have long-term on recruitment and retention.
"If the war were to end tomorrow, the impact on re-enlistments likely would be very different than three years from now," MacDermid said.
Some soldiers, of course, are getting out, for themselves or for their families. ("There's a saying in the Army - 'You enlist a soldier, but you re-enlist a family' - and that's true," said Command Sgt. Maj. James Plemons, who oversees retention for the 101st.)
Staff Sgt. Bobby Miller, 31, has spent more than 10 years in the Army said he is getting out when his term ends in less than a year. The 101st soldier has served in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq and said he has barely seen his wife and two children in the past few years.
"It's not that we don't want to deploy; I'd like a little more stabilization," Miller said.
Pinkley was riding in a Humvee the day after Thanksgiving when it was rocked by a bomb. He suffered internal injuries and is still healing from the shrapnel wounds. He said he and his wife discussed for more than a year whether he should re-enlist.
In the end, despite his pain and his wife's fear for his life, they decided it was best for both of them, she said. His next position will be as a drill sergeant at Fort Benning, Ga.
"I'm excited about it," his wife said. "It's something he wanted to do. We told him we'd be supportive of him whatever he wanted." As for the possibility of her husband being sent off to a combat zone again, she said: "We would definitely do it again if we had to."
|
war on iraq is war on terror? misleading propaganda. :/
|
On April 24 2004 14:17 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
war on iraq is war on terror? misleading propaganda. :/
Words of wisdom. Read Rich Clarke's book if you haven't, really opened my eyes o_o.
|
|
|
United States12237 Posts
On April 24 2004 14:20 GooDGaMe[cF] wrote: Show nested quote +On April 24 2004 14:17 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
war on iraq is war on terror? misleading propaganda. :/ Words of wisdom. Read Rich Clarke's book if you haven't, really opened my eyes o_o.
That book was such trash. Most of his insinuations were falsified not only by this administration and the previous administration, but by his own contradicting words. We've been over Clarke's lies that were created just to sell his book, so I won't continue to go over that, but suffice it so say the man is a lying conniving opportunist capitalizing on the politicization of 9/11 by the Democrats and the media.
|
United States12237 Posts
And another thing - I just wanted to point out the terrible bias on this forum on the part of the moderators. This is mainly Rekrul but there may be others so I apologize if I cast blame at one where multiple people are at fault. The bias is very simple - any news that benefits America, or its foreign or domestic policy, any proven points that benefit the Presidential administration, are always ALWAYS taken down swiftly. However on the flip side, anti-American threads routinely get above 100 replies and are almost never closed. Why is this so? Is equality really such a stretch here that pro-America news must be censored?
|
On April 24 2004 14:31 Excalibur_Z wrote: Show nested quote +On April 24 2004 14:20 GooDGaMe[cF] wrote: On April 24 2004 14:17 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
war on iraq is war on terror? misleading propaganda. :/ Words of wisdom. Read Rich Clarke's book if you haven't, really opened my eyes o_o. That book was such trash. Most of his insinuations were falsified not only by this administration and the previous administration, but by his own contradicting words. We've been over Clarke's lies that were created just to sell his book, so I won't continue to go over that, but suffice it so say the man is a lying conniving opportunist capitalizing on the politicization of 9/11 by the Democrats and the media.
Same with ex major giovanni, and many other politician out there. Everything is fueled by money, and what is it that every single man wants? Power. As Scarface once said, "first you get the money, then you get the power." It was no different in colonial times, and it isnt different now.
|
Russian Federation722 Posts
stop with the political threads, hasnt rekrul closed enough of yours already?
|
On April 24 2004 14:17 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
war on iraq is war on terror? misleading propaganda. :/
The U.S. Army is still in Afghanistan too. That is part of the war on terror.
Iraq is very much part of the war on terror. There were terrorist training camps in Iraq. And we are currently fighting Terrorists in Iraq.
|
Russian Federation722 Posts
On April 24 2004 14:35 Excalibur_Z wrote:
And another thing - I just wanted to point out the terrible bias on this forum on the part of the moderators. This is mainly Rekrul but there may be others so I apologize if I cast blame at one where multiple people are at fault. The bias is very simple - any news that benefits America, or its foreign or domestic policy, any proven points that benefit the Presidential administration, are always ALWAYS taken down swiftly. However on the flip side, anti-American threads routinely get above 100 replies and are almost never closed. Why is this so? Is equality really such a stretch here that pro-America news must be censored?
uh wrong, the ones bashing america always get little annoying know it alls who jump on and assemble 20 pages worth of crap in 2 minutes and the admins can no longer close it cuz theres a huge "debate" in progression. the ones pro-america never get any replies and are usually just as worthless so they are closed..
|
What's the point of closing them if they don't get any replies anyway? Are you annoying as hell AND stupid? Yes.
|
On April 24 2004 15:31 x[ReaPeR]x wrote: Show nested quote +On April 24 2004 14:17 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
war on iraq is war on terror? misleading propaganda. :/ There were terrorist training camps in Iraq. And we are currently fighting Terrorists in Iraq.
No, there weren't those camps. There is no proof of a connection between El Quaida and Saddam. Terrorists came after Iraq was invaded because of those weapons that weren't there.
|
On April 24 2004 15:48 Wirthi wrote: Show nested quote +On April 24 2004 15:31 x[ReaPeR]x wrote: On April 24 2004 14:17 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
war on iraq is war on terror? misleading propaganda. :/ There were terrorist training camps in Iraq. And we are currently fighting Terrorists in Iraq. No, there weren't those camps. There is no proof of a connection between El Quaida and Saddam. Terrorists came after Iraq was invaded because of those weapons that weren't there.
They weren't Al Qaida camps I'm pretty sure, but they were camps.
The terrorists are there, war are fighting them, therefore we are fighting terror.
How do you know the weapons weren't there.
|
Political threads are so boring and redundant, same thing over and over. People use the same arguments, only recycled and worded in the most extravagant way possible, in hopes of convincing others of their virtual intelligence. Please, one thread is enough, not 3 or 4 talking about war in iraq, or japanese attacks. Also, instead of bashing each other, please concentrate on constructive discussions, rather than continuing the endless bullshit.
This should be common sense, but many of you seem to lack in that department.
|
I wouldn't consider the Iraqis that we are fighting as terrorists, but that is just me.
|
On April 24 2004 16:07 x[ReaPeR]x wrote: Show nested quote +On April 24 2004 15:48 Wirthi wrote: On April 24 2004 15:31 x[ReaPeR]x wrote: On April 24 2004 14:17 STIMEY d okgm fish wrote:
war on iraq is war on terror? misleading propaganda. :/ There were terrorist training camps in Iraq. And we are currently fighting Terrorists in Iraq. No, there weren't those camps. There is no proof of a connection between El Quaida and Saddam. Terrorists came after Iraq was invaded because of those weapons that weren't there. They weren't Al Qaida camps I'm pretty sure, but they were camps. The terrorists are there, war are fighting them, therefore we are fighting terror. How do you know the weapons weren't there.
sigh
|
On April 24 2004 16:23 taeWook wrote:
Political threads are so boring and redundant, same thing over and over. People use the same arguments, only recycled and worded in the most extravagant way possible, in hopes of convincing others of their virtual intelligence. Please, one thread is enough, not 3 or 4 talking about war in iraq, or japanese attacks. Also, instead of bashing each other, please concentrate on constructive discussions, rather than continuing the endless bullshit.
This should be common sense, but many of you seem to lack in that department.
I love you taewook.
EDIT: You could've thrown in a nice yawn. 
|
|
|
On April 24 2004 16:23 taeWook wrote:
Also, instead of bashing each other, please concentrate on constructive discussions, rather than continuing the endless bullshit.
This should be common sense, but many of you seem to lack in that department.
Why do people Say shit like "Dont flame" and then Follow it up with an insult.
Thats fucking ignorant.
|
On April 24 2004 17:07 RG20SaTuRNiNe wrote: Show nested quote +On April 24 2004 16:23 taeWook wrote:
Also, instead of bashing each other, please concentrate on constructive discussions, rather than continuing the endless bullshit.
This should be common sense, but many of you seem to lack in that department. Why do people Say shit like "Dont flame" and then Follow it up with an insult. Thats fucking ignorant.
lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
