Gould,

Whine, whine, whine. Those called up have a military OBLIGATION to serve
when called. Those are the rules under which they volunteered. They are
needed, hence they are called. Is there something wrong with that? Is a
deal a deal, or what?

There may be some retired reservisists among the recalled. But those who
have served over twenty of active service have no reserve obligation.
Retired regular officers are subject to recall until age 60 or 62 depending
upon rank when placed on the retired list.

It may surprise you to know that literally thousands of active duty retired
soldiers volunteered for retiree recall status after 09-11. We continue to
be prepared to serve if needed. I'm 64 and fully prepared to go whenever
and wherever the Army may want me. I remain in good fighting shape and can
score a maximum on the Army's phisical readiness test.

If the Army feels we are to old too serve in Irag or Afganistan we can serve
in the US or overseas and free up a younger soldier for service in the
combat zones.

You guys just don't have a clue as to how honored many professional soldiers
are just to be allowed to serve this magnificant country in some way. BTW,
any soldier today can rightfully be called a professional soldier.

Butch Davis
"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Hopefully, the majority of those called will be Bush supporters. Let
them share in the joys of Bush's nasty little war.


That's awful. Nobody should be drafted, Bush supporter or not.

If this weren't an election year, we'd be seeing a draft. Instead, we're
calling back
40 and 50-year old guys who have already been honorably discharged, may
even
have a military pension, and who have certainly earned the right to live
the
rest of their lives without excessive government intrusion. Businesses,
careers, families, etc all go on hold.

Talk about giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Don't even say "lberals
do....."
When we make a loud public announcement about having to send the press
gang to
round up the toothless old grey hairs to continue the war in Iraq, that
has to
encourage the hell out of the enemy. It sounds like we're running out of
manpower.

More of the same non-logic from our government. We can increase
discretionary
government spending by 30% in 3 1/2 years *and* have a huge tax cut.
We can occupy a large country, say that doing so presents a credible
threat to
other bad actors that we stand ready to invade their countries too, *and*
cut
military benefits while avoiding mandatory enlistments (and apparently
scrambling to plug the holes in the front line with any available bodies).

If we hope to kill every Muslim on the planet, as many suggest, we are
going to
need a lot more people than we have.
(I would say, eliminate the terrorist individuals instead of the
"terrorist
race/religion", and we can do that without
expanding the war or imposing universal service).