Skip to comments.Vanity:What percentage of troops/reserves do we have stationed/left
Posted on 10/11/2004 1:31:22 PM PDT by LowOiL
I need to know (perferable sourced to a trustworthy URL) the percentage of reservist we have stationed worldwide and stateside. I am tired of hearing how thinly spread our soldiers are without knowing the true figures.
Can anyone give me an idea of what the percentages really are.
That's classified, need to know, and above your pay grade.
I wish I had a moose picture.
We have enough that the Air Force is dismissing new recruits rather than reassigning them if they aren't doing well in tech school. That one I know for certain.
Also, every branch of the active military has met or exceeded recruitment quotas this year, or such was true last time I saw a press release from the DoD on the matter.
Well I need to know and you are most certainly right about being above my pay grade. My tagline should read "Poor Christian and proud of it".
I've just had a discussion about the numbers. Active duty forces according to DOD 1.4 million. At a hearing in front of the Armed Services Committee Rumsfeld said that we have 2.5 Military Personnel. If I can find the links again to back this up I'll post them.
As of today, the U.S. still has troops in 135 countries around the world; some of them are assigned to the U.N. and wear blue helmets as peace keepers. I do not know what our reserve strength really is but I know that we do not have enough troops here in the U.S. to guard our borders. There are rumors floating around of the Internet about U.N. troops from Eastern Europe stationed here for 'training' operations. Some of them were used by Clinton at Waco, albeit illegally, to wipe out women and children. 'Nuff said.
Usually Soldier of Fortune has data on the military and where it is currently. Not sure if DoD has anything on their website. Don't be surprised if you run into a lot of "that's classified"!
Thank you "Pieces". Please post that link if you find it. I would be most gracious. I am arguing with a bunch of whinny butt liberals at a emulation site .
I am tired of their rhetoric on the Bush draft subject that they just keep defending even with liberal sources proving them wrong.
"...he report is deliberately misleading and fails to provide the overall numbers. There are currently about 150,000 troops deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan combined - 90% of them in Iraq incidentally - and the same number of army and marine reservists and guardsmen on active duty. One third of the forces in those places are guard or reserve, two thirds are active. The remaining two thirds of the call up are providing service and support in the rest of the world or taking the place of active duty forces deployed to Iraq."
"The deployment overall is 150k. The active duty military is ten times that size. And the reserve military is about as much again. Half the army are reserves, about a third of the air force, a fifth of the other branches. The force is designed to use the reserves in wartime, we are in wartime, so they are used extensively. But the force involved is much smaller than the overall force. Yes troops are rotated through - deliberately, to keep the strain on individual units down, cover all the DoD's other commitments around the world, and provide time for continuing training back in the states. Only a modest portion of the army is in Iraq at any one time, but a large portion (still by no means all - since some units are dedicated to other theaters) will serve there at some point."
"The notion being peddled here, that the US military, with a $400 billion annual budget and over 2 million volunteers, can't keep less than 10% of them on station indefinitely, is a deliberate lie. They have been, are, and will continue to do so. The men are certainly sweating, but the system as a whole was designed to take on the Warsaw Pact, and a few militias in podunk aren't even going to slow it down."
7 posted on 09/16/2004 10:02:52 AM EDT by JasonC
On September 23, 2004 Rumsfeld was before the Armed Services Committee and was asked by two Republican Senators about the draft. That's where he speaks of the 2.5 million came from.
About the fifth paragraph down it gives the figure of 2.5 million. Still haven't found the link for 1.4 million.
Keep reading the link I posted - that's where Rumsfeld speaks of the 1.4 million active force. It was also said at that hearing that even if they had to increase the force size, it would still be a voluntary force.
Thank you Sir.. You are a gentleman indeed.
Very useful information there, thank you Sir.
Not what you asked for but here are some good figures in light of the Kerry's scare tactics threatening the public with a draft.
"The Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard all met or exceeded their year-end recruiting goals for fiscal year 2003, which ended Sept. 30. The figures continued to climb in the first half of fiscal year 2004, which was reached March 31.
The Army is at 100.1 percent of its "active duty mission," said spokesman Douglas Smith, reviewing numbers current as of March 29. Smith said 34,593 soldiers had been enlisted for the active Army and 8,331 for the Reserves. The
Army has been ahead of its goal every year since 2000 and every month this year, Smith said.
Navy re-enlistment rates are at an all time high, with 62.3 percent of first-term sailors signing up for additional service. That compares with a targeted goal of 56 percent. The rate has grown each year since 2000, when 48.2 percent of the first-term sailors re-enlisted.
For those with six to 10 years of service, the Navy re-enlisted 74.1 percent; its goal had been 70 percent. For those with 10 to 14 years of service, 88.7 percent re-enlisted so far this year; the goal was 85 percent. "
the Military is more than exceeding its recruitment and re-enlistment numbers, . The "stop loss" is simply because it makes more sense to keep people with experience in the hot areas instead of bringing in new faces that have to learn
it all over again. Especially in Iraq, where the relationship between soldiers and local populace is crucial to winning.
Doesnt sound good in a sound bite for the DNC, but them are the facts, folks. http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_numbers_041404,00.html?ESRC=airforce-a.nl
Ugh... I have gotten into a few political "discussions" on emulation sites before. Not worth the hassle, IMHO. You are dealing with an apolitical class who use the Daily Show for their source of news and commentary.
In my opinion, emunerds are great for learning how to run ROM X in emulator Y while using operating system Z, but for political discussion... It's more fun to hop around on a pogo stick with a loaded shotgun in your mouth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.