Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size

Military Photos

Current poll results

Is the U.S. military relying too heavily on National Guard and Reserve forces?

Yes54 %54 %54 % 54.00 % (54)
No41 %41 %41 % 41.00 % (41)
I do not know2 %2 %2 % 2.00 % (2)
I have no opinion2 %2 %2 % 2.00 % (2)
Other, please list in comments1 %1 %1 % 1.00 % (1)

Total votes: 100
One vote is allowed per day

[ Voting booth | Other polls ]


Display Order
Re: Is the U.S. military relying too heavily on National Gua
by Anonymous
on Mar 14, 2004
The only thing that ever bothers me about the way such forces are deployed and used is the effect it has upon people who are, fundamentally, NOT professionally full-time military... the effect upon their families I mean, their careers, their employers and co-workers, their (usually smallish) local communities. I can see the DOD rationale which is, paraphrased, keep the full-time force as low in number as possible, use reserves and guard in time of need, save money. However, it sometimes appears that the DOD (or Congress, for that matter, actually) are saving money and at the same time we are getting ourselves into wider and wider war conflicts either by having been forced to defend ourselves or, occasionally, by choice (Haiti, Nicaragua, Balkans et al).
The professionalISM of the guard and reserves is, so far as I am aware, absolutely above reproach... but does it not seem then that they are acting in the capacity of full-time reserves and guard? It is a lot to expect of anyone to try and operate a business or hold down a job, pay mortgages and credit debt (which is endlessly being encouraged for people to bring upon themselves), serve their communities in churches and volunteer roles, and keep the sanctity of marriages and children functioning as it should AND be expected to offer their lives open-endedly in defense of our national freedom anywhere in the world with little notice.
If memory serves correctly, from reading posts on PF over a lot of time, the laws which protect the private lives of reserves and guard are not what they should be so as to make this increased role they are playing in national defense possible without some very destructive consequences.
Maybe we are just reaching toward a new threshhold of awareness that their role has changed in terms of force deployment, and for that reason we might expect the laws to change accordingly and help those people either HAVE truly secure lives at home, or handle their activated service differently so as to reflect a mission nobody expected would ever occur.

Re: Is the U.S. military relying too heavily on National Gua
by Anonymous
on Mar 14, 2004
When I speak of "the laws which protect the lives of reserves and guard"... what I am referring to is those laws and arrangements between government and private enterprise which have such restricted limitations upon them as to be initially good and fine but in the end not nearly enough... examples would be the length of time a reserve or guard IS actually allowed to be away from their job before pay and other benefits cease or are severly curtailed, and the ACTUAL length of time credit debt is forgiven or held off AND at what cost, matters such as that, about which I am no expert.

Re: Is the U.S. military relying too heavily on National Gua
by Anonymous
on Mar 16, 2004
We are well past the point of bringing back the draft. This would inclued the ladies as well. No more free ride, you do a few years with Uncle.
Freedom isn't Free, well it's about time some start paying for it!

Re: Is the U.S. military relying too heavily on National Gua
by RBeigher
on Jul 10, 2010

Yes!! As a former reservist, I know the feeling of being activated and taken from civilian life. The guard and reserve should only be activated in the event of a "declared" war, not for a war of choice. Business people in my unit lost their means of making a living for the families. Our Christmas collections went to families in our unit. I could not make my house or other payments on active duty. When I got out, I owed more than when I went on active duty. The guard and reserves have been used far too much over the last 9 years. There should be a draft and the national guard and reserves should be used only when our country is in a necessary war. They should not be used for multiple tours of duty in a war zone. The active duty troops should be beefed up so that they will not be called upon to be in perpetual peril. Active duty troops should be paid for substantially more money. Our troops put their lives on the line every day in a war zone, and although they get combat pay, it is not enough.

Only logged in users are allowed to comment. register/log in
Military History
Forum Posts

Military Polls

Should active duty military members speech be censored in public?

[ Results | Polls ]

Votes: 200

This Day in History
1563: The Peace of Amboise is signed granting rights to the Huguenots.

1571: Spanish troops occupy Manila.

1865: Confederate General Joseph Johnston makes a desperate attempt to stop Union General William T. Shermans drive through the Carolinas in the wars last days, but Johnstons motley army cannot stop the advance of Shermans mighty army.

1903: The U.S. Senate ratifies the Cuban treaty, gaining naval bases in Guantanamo and Bahia Honda.

1916: The First Aerosquadron takes off from Columbus, NM to join Gen. John J. Pershing and his Punitive Expedition against Pancho Villa in Mexico.

1917: The U.S. Navy Department authorizes the enrollment of women in the Naval Reserve.

1920: The U.S. Senate rejects the Treaty of Versailles for a second time refusing to ratify the League of Nations covenant.

1924: U.S. troops are rushed to Tegucigalpa as rebel forces take the Honduran capital.

1928: Marine planes bombed a bandit group at Nueva Segovia, Nicaragua.

1935: The British fire on 20,000 Muslims in India, killing 23.