Article

2003-11-13 Home Front

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2003-11-13 3:02:19 PM|| || Front Page|| [11126 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I'm glad this was worked out, but the bottom line is that she shouldn't be in the service if it interferes with raising her/his kids. It is NOT an 8-5 job with weekends and holidays off, with good health benefits. She knew when she signed her enlistment contract that part of the deal is you are willing to be deployed. She signed it and she banked the checks. She just ended up making everyone do a shitload of paperwork, when the Army could have easily have booted her out, instead of doing the scutwork and doing it right.

Basically it's her and her husband's fault. If you can't deploy, don't enlist. End of story.

Posted by Anonymous 2003-11-13 3:17:01 PM|| 2003-11-13 3:17:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 Damn Straight! She cashed those guard checks every month and now that she is needed she can't deploy? I understand her situation but she should have resigned from the reserves long ago. Anyone want to bet they rewrite the rules for spouses in the military?

Posted by Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) 2003-11-13 3:47:49 PM|| 2003-11-13 3:47:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 If you can't deploy, don't enlist. End of story.

The military has rules regading this sort of situation - enlistees are required to arrange child care in advance. The problem here is that some sort of dispute arose between Sgt. Holcomb's mother and ex-wife (who were caring for the kids in their absence) and it ended up in the court system.

She cashed those guard checks every month and now that she is needed she can't deploy?

She already did deploy to Iraq. Both husband and wife had to take emergency leave to try to sort this whole mess out.

I forgot where I read this, but apparently someone higher up in the chain of command is possibly looking to discharge Sgt. Holcomb's wife for parental reasons. No mention was made if it would be honorable or not.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2003-11-13 4:06:08 PM|| 2003-11-13 4:06:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Perhaps that is something we should consider, given our manpower shortage.

A secondary, 8 to 5, Monday through Friday, military reserve. That in ADDITION to the normal reserves. We'd pick up any number of useful people, even former military personell, who aren't serving because they have their hands full of family and can't do the 24/7 thing anymore.

Just a thought.

Ed Becerra.

Posted by Ed Becerra 2003-11-13 4:08:48 PM|| 2003-11-13 4:08:48 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 I am local to this.

What happened is the Ex-Wife caused all this trouble, and some damn fool judge in Family Court allowed her too.

The childcare plan was set, and was fine, passed all the regs for both of them and the Army. But once they both got overseas, the EX-WIFE judge shopped, and got a judge to declae, in their absence that one of the two HAD to be there or they woudl lose custody to his 2 children form the former marriage.

This was a cold blooded power play by the ex-wife. The ex knew that either he had to screw his career up, or his new wife would have to screw up her time with the Guard, or else she could steal sole custody.

This whole thing was set up by the ex-wofe to cause as much pain to her former husband and new wife as possible.

The Civilian Judge should be ashamed for going along with this, and putting in a court order forcing one of the two to remain home or lose custody.

Posted by Anonymous 2003-11-13 4:36:57 PM|| 2003-11-13 4:36:57 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 They both deployed that indicates a willingness to serve to me. On the Yellowstone I had 23 women working for me - one of them was a QM3 who was serving on her second ship. She never deployed and never intended to. Here husband could have taken care of her daughter during deployments but she weasled out just before deploying on a Med cruise. She left the team short. Luckily, we had crossed trained several others QM's for plotting duty during Navigation Detail. Used to really gripe me that she drew active duty pay but never intended to serve.

Posted by Super Hose 2003-11-13 8:05:47 PM|| 2003-11-13 8:05:47 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Perhaps that is something we should consider, given our manpower shortage. A secondary, 8 to 5, Monday through Friday, military reserve.
I'm not sure about the "Monday through Friday, 8 to 5" bit, but I agree, we need a back-up plan - something we don't have now.

Originally, the Guard and Reserve WERE the backup plan. Unfortunately, the HUGE drawdown of military forces after the collapse of the Soviet Union was way too deep, too soon. We knew even then that there were other enemies to face, and our military was stretched dangerously thin. Today, we use the Reserves and Guard the same way generals in World War II used their combat reserves. At the moment, the Guard and Reserves are as over-stretched as the active force. Unfortunately, that leaves us with no back-up at all.

The Brits used mustered-out, wounded, and overage military and former military to fill home base positions, while the young, active duty warriors went off to BE warriors. We're a huge nation, with nearly 300 million people. There are more than eight million Vietnam era vets we could draw on to take care of stateside duties while we fought in Iraq. Many of us volunteered. Many more probably would.

Perhaps what we need is a back-up force consisting of former and retired military, volunteers, and family members, who can do the routine, day-to-day things that need to be done, but don't require an active military soldier to do them. Perhaps they could be organized to support specific units, or a specific base, or a specific command. Someone yesterday mentioned Heinlein's "Starship Troopers". Heinlein's philosophy in that book was "Everyone works, everyone plays, everyone fights". Maybe that's how we need to re-shape our military.

The War on Terror may well last fifty years. We need to start thinking in those terms. We may be lucky, and it won't last that long, but we need to plan as if it might. That should have started the day after 9/11. We may be getting the ball rolling late, but better late than never. Incidents like this may be the catalyst to begin those changes.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-11-13 10:17:12 PM|| [http://users.codenet.net/mweather/default.htm] 2003-11-13 10:17:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of 20-30 something vets who would gladly go back on active duty. Hell, if they didn't want to send me back to basic, I'd reup tomorrow. But I think OP is right, there are plenty of vets who would join up as 'Home Guard' troops, filling admin and training billets in CONUS.

I'd still rather ruck up and go do what I could to help out with the 10th mtn.

Posted by Anonymous 2003-11-13 11:21:23 PM|| 2003-11-13 11:21:23 PM|| Front Page Top

00:15 Jeff
00:09 Jeff
00:03 Old Patriot
23:54 Old Patriot
23:53 Allah
23:48 Old Patriot
23:41 Jarhead
23:22 Frank G
23:21 Anonymous
23:20 Jarhead
23:19 Cheddarhead
23:18 Old Patriot
23:14 Frank G
22:59 Anonymous
22:56 Old Patriot
22:44 Anonymous
22:43 Old Patriot
22:38 Cyber Sarge
22:37 Anonymous
22:36 Cyber Sarge
22:17 Old Patriot
22:04 Rawsnacks
22:01 Old Patriot
21:50 Anonymous