A fellow blogger recently asked me, through a comment on my About Me page, for my thoughts on a piece she wrote in 2010 about the U.S. Army’s stop loss policy. The following link is to the piece she asked me to comment on:
http://irresponsibility.wordpress.com/2010/01/16/us-army-stop-loss-policy-is-unlawful-imprisonment/
I am honored that anyone would ask for my feedback on the subject. I hope, however, she doesn’t regret asking! While I appreciate her effort, (and anyone in general who draws attention to the policy), I can’t say I entirely agree with the commentary. My thoughts on the subject follow …
Oh boy, where do I begin? First let me say thank you for contacting me and asking for my thoughts on the subject. All of the NCO’s (sergeants) in my platoon who I deployed with to Iraq were stop lossed and on their second tour. My husband was stop lossed for his second tour. When we came back from Iraq, and I became pregnant with my son, I basically had two choices: leave early or stay late. Either way, simply remaining active for the time I had initially signed up for was not an option. I had to choose between either exercising my legal right to chapter out of the Army before my son was born, or finishing my active enlistment period knowing I would be stop lossed and deployed again, this time with a newborn baby at home. I chose to end my contract early because I knew I was not as strong as the numerous women I deployed with who had to leave their babies home while they marched off to war. (If anyone has earned the title “Hero,” in my opinion, it is these women). I would have preferred to finish my time in, and I absolutely would have if it weren’t for the stop loss policy.
Having said all that, I have to respectfully disagree with the overall sentiment of your post. I agree stop loss is a bad policy. When it is implemented the way it was in my unit (which I’ll get to in a minute), in my opinion it’s wrong and an abuse of the clause. It’s terrible for morale, and it results in a lot of soldiers spending a tremendous amount of time and effort trying to figure out how to avoid it. But I do not agree it’s illegal. I can see how you could argue the point, as you did well, if you only look at that tiny section of the contract which you site. But as fullbasicload pointed out, there are many more pages to the contract, and in the course of those pages, it’s spelled out pretty clearly that ALL soldiers sign an eight year contract. Stop loss or no stop loss, you are subject to reactivation at ANY TIME during that eight year period. (The following About.com article touches on this a bit: http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/joiningup/a/recruiter4.htm).
It’s all there in black and white when you sign your contract, although fullbasicload is right when he explains that the soldier’s understanding of what that actually means is usually dramatically different from the reality. The way the contract reads implies that if there is some unexpected national emergency, like another attack on U.S. soil, you will be called back to service. The recruiter’s explanation of the contract reinforces this implied meaning; however, anyone who puts the slightest bit of effort into finding out more about making the biggest decision of their life, either through talking to other soldiers or vets, or even doing a basic Google search about joining the military, will find out instantly what everyone in the service knows all too well: Recruiters lie. Contracts don’t. It’s all right there in the contract, but whether it is right, wrong, illegal or just immoral, the way stop loss has been implemented is, in my opinion, a bad idea and an abuse of the clause.
In the 3rd Infantry Division (ironically the same division your infamous rapping soldier hails from), whether or not you can expect to be stop lossed is entirely dependent upon what date your ETS happens to fall on (End Term Service—end of the active portion of your contract, NOT the eight year period you committed to). In other words, it’s a total crap shoot, a luck of the draw, and on the surface appears to border on arbitrary. The 3rd Infantry Division does not implement stop loss as a rare measure reserved for emergency situations, but as a matter of policy for any soldier whose ETS happens to fall within 90 days of a deployment cycle. Since the division is what they call in the Army a “Rapid Deploying Unit,” which means it pretty much deploys every other year, there is a pretty good chance that your ETS will fall within this window, and you are going to get extended for another tour. This policy, incidentally, not only applies to getting out of the Army, but it also applies to unit transfers as well. This is the first thing a new soldier learns when he or she reports to the 3rd ID because it is just a fact of life for Dog Faced Soldiers.
What you have as a result is a bunch of soldiers trying to figure out how to get out of their second tour before they’ve even deployed for their first. This is horrible for morale. It fosters resentment, crushes loyalty, and makes for an awful lot of disgruntled soldiers. What most civilians don’t really realize when they thank a soldier for their service or their sacrifice is what that sacrifice is. A soldier—stop loss or no stop loss—willingly sacrifices his or her freedom in order to stand on call to protect yours. The key word here is willingly. Your contract makes that very clear before you sign, and so does anyone who knows anything about the military who you may talk to before joining. This isn’t because the military is mean or evil or doesn’t care about its soldiers. It is this way because it has to be, especially in a nation that doesn’t exercise the draft. It is this way because even the United States Constitution makes it very clear that national security trumps personal freedom, and having an Army staffed with individuals who could just go on strike or quit when they felt like it would be a grave threat to national security. Stop loss and the IRR recall, however, are the most extreme examples of how a soldier surrenders his or her freedom for eight years when they sign their contract, and the way it is implemented is often, in my humble opinion, an abuse of that contract.
That is not to say that there are no valid reasons for implementing the policy the way it has been. The 3rd Infantry Division cites “unit cohesion” for its justification of its stop loss policy. Units are given a certain number of slots for each job position. When a soldier is holding that slot, a new soldier will not be sent to fill the slot until that soldier leaves. Without stop loss, if you are a company commander and one-third of your company is scheduled to ETS about a month before you deploy, you will be going to war with one-third fewer soldiers than you should. When and if those soldiers are replaced, those replacements will be newcomers who haven’t trained with the rest of the soldiers in the unit or have in any way come to know each other’s strengths, weaknesses, and how they operate before entering a combat situation together. This is harmful to unit cohesion and dangerous for soldiers on the battlefield. Instead of revising the way soldiers are replaced in a unit (assuming that’s even possible with the number of soldiers the Army has to work with), it is more expedient and efficient for the military to simply stop loss all soldiers getting ready to leave.
I could go on and on about the complexities of this policy, valid reasons for why it is implemented, why I think it shouldn’t be implemented, alternative solutions, etc., but hopefully I’ve said enough to shed some light on the intricacies of the policy. As with most things in the Army that seem absolutely ludicrous from a civilian point-of-view, it is done the way it is for a reason—that’s not to say there isn’t a better way to do it, but the solution is almost never as cut and dry or obvious as it seems on the surface.
The devastating psychological outcome of stop loss and multiple tours definitely has a trickle down effect that is harmful to lower-enlisted soldiers who look at their leadership and think, “Is this what I have to look forward to? Is there really no end in site?” If I ever write a novel or a memoire of my time in service, stop loss will undoubtedly feature prominently throughout the book because it is unquestionably a dominant theme that characterizes in one way or another the service of every soldier stationed in a Rapid Deploying Unit (which is, in fact, a small percentage of the Army. While only about 1% of the population serves, the entire burden of both wars has been born mostly on the shoulders of a small percentage of that 1%). But again, as fullbasicload has pointed out, this is the consequence of an all-volunteer Army in a nation that doesn’t implement a draft. A huge factor in my decision to enlist when I did was that I don’t believe democracies should practice conscription, but in order to maintain an all volunteer Army, you need volunteers.
As for the private cited in the beginning of your post, I have to say that while to a civilian, a rap song may seem harmless, this is one of those situations that illuminates how military life and the civilian world are sometimes universes apart. You ask, “Ask a soldier what’s scarier: a couple of rhyming couplets, or redeployment to Iraq?” I would answer deploying to Iraq standing next to the guy who wrote the couplets. It is one thing to write a rap song about killing your chain of command, which in itself is subversion and deserving at the very least of harsh reprimand; it is an entirely different thing to send the lyrics of that song TO THE PENTAGON right before you are, in fact, about to be stop lossed. Any soldier who lives and breathes military life knows exactly what kind of repercussion will come following such a move—especially on the heels of the Fort Hood massacre—which indicates that the soldier who did that was either coming completely unhinged or is absolutely fucking retarded. Since the latter is highly unlikely given his time in service, anything less than the punishment he received would have been gravely irresponsible on the part of his chain of command.
I can’t stress this point enough. I know soldiers who were stationed at Fort Hood when one of the officers who was entrusted with their care and well being opened fire on them. That of course is the most well-known and extreme example of a soldier loosing his mind, but for soldiers who deploy, knowing that the soldier standing next to you with a loaded weapon could come unhinged at any time is a reality. All soldiers who have deployed know “that guy” who they wish the command would send home. When command does not send “that guy” home, that’s often when atrocities happen. I have personally been the target of a soldier’s loose grip on reality right before his weapon was taken away from him and he was sent home. As a soldier, you rely on your command to immediately identify and protect you from other soldiers who show any sign they might turn on you or are otherwise coming unglued. When you are dealing with an entire force of an unimaginably stressed and often disgruntled population armed with semi-automatic weapons, you don’t have the luxury of ignoring red flags, no matter how small, or dismissing any threat as artistic expression, trivial as it may seem to the civilian world. Even if you are correct, and it was a harmless expression of his disgruntlement, the difference is that as a civilian, you are not expected to know the repercussions of such actions, but as a soldier he has no excuse. He knew better. It is not the song lyrics that were the red flag—it is the fact that he completely disregarded the consequences of sending those lyrics TO THE PENTAGON.
Having said all that, I hope you don’t regret having asked for my opinion on the subject! As a veteran, I do appreciate any light that is shed on the stop loss policy. I believe it is harmful and destructive to soldiers and the military alike. When I was a soldier, I often said I wished the people who were putting their effort into protesting the war would direct their energy instead to the stop loss policy; however, I must tell you I don’t know too many soldiers who would not be offended by the comparison—well intended as it may be—of their service to a Nazi death camp. Most of the soldiers I served with knew full well what they were signing up for, and they were happy to do their part and serve their deployment. They were not devastated by the war; they were devastated by the never-ending prospect of it. But I do appreciate your interest in a subject most people have comfortably ignored for the duration of the war, and I thank you for doing your part to draw attention to it.
Related articles
- An Ideal For Which I Am Prepared To Die (onlyspartanwomen.com)
- In Memory of SGT Mason Lee Lewis (onlyspartanwomen.com)
- OIF/OEF Retroactive Stop Loss Pay Deadline Extended (vabenefitblog.com)
You are exceptionally thorough and “legally” aware. These two things will save you a lot of trouble in life. You also write exceptionally well.
Thank you so much! I tend to be rather long winded, but that’s just because I always feel compelled to dissect things from multiple angles!
I’ve done a uso tour for navy entertainment. It was truly one of the highlights of my comedy career. I honestly don’t know how you guys and gals do it, but I’m glad that you do.
That is so awesome you did that! Soldiers really appreciate it when people go all the way over there. I remember when we were acclimating in Kuwait and waiting to go into Iraq, there were bands that played on a stage at night where all the food vendors were, and it definitely took the edge off, especially for first timers like myself who had no idea what to expect or what we were heading into. Thank you for that.
please, for me it was nothing and a great experience. thank you!
Wow, I so appreciate your intelligent discussion on the stoploss policy. I have a son in law who endured torture and came home psychologically scarred with PTS, like so many young soldiers. Also with gravely impaired health. I cant imagine having survived one term of duty, having to turn right around and go back for another term. Thank you for your very informative look at the situation. I so agree that women fulfilling active duty leaving babies at home are definitely heroes. Huge sacrifices are being made day by day and year by year. “Thank you” is not nearly enough of a return. Learning more about what soldiers go through should be every person’s quest – and supporting what veterans need in the way of services when they return home.
Thank you so much. I’m so sorry to hear what your son-in-law has been through. I have been very blessed, and there are so many soldiers who have endured things that are just unimaginable to me. Thank you for your kind words and your support.
Mrs. Spartan…nah yer not that long winded(mean you’ve been to my site right?…lol) Again excpetionally well written on a subject I was not well versed in so thanks…this post brings up so many questions fer me in addition to the stop loss policy, I am interested in yer perspective about women in the military (not whether they can fight, we have obviously solved that one…but I guess whether they should…Lil’ Mouse can take out the garbage…I just don’t like her too…it’s a dirty job, a man’s job)
Anyway, very interesting post, well written and God bless both you and Mr. Spartan
Ah dysu, so many great questions you have asked me on all my posts, where do I begin?! Of course, I could write a novel on each topic! Stop loss is one of those seldom-discussed subjects most people really don’t know much about. The whole time I was in the Army, I used to get so frustrated with protesters and think, “stop protesting the war and start protesting stop loss!” But as I point out in my post, I know it’s not that simple. In some ways, it’s a necessary evil. I just wish the Army didn’t use it the way it does because it feels like an abuse of the policy.
As for women in the military, oh boy! I guess my position on that subject is kind of obvious, seeing as I was one, so really the question then is why do I think women should fight? It’s really funny when I think about it actually–I was pro-women-in-combat my whole life, even though I never in a million years thought I could be one! In some ways, I was plenty girly growing up, but in most ways, I was one of those loud, outspoken, rough and tumble tomboy types that didn’t know women were even supposed to have a place, let alone where it was! For whatever reason, (culture, media, family influences, who knows), I always admired the strong women of history. I could care less about movie stars, but as a kid, I was always in awe of Cleopatra, Annie Oakley, Joan of Arc, etc. In fact, when I was in high school, and one of my term paper assignments was to research a woman in history, I chose Joan of Arc. In college, we were assigned a position paper in which one of the many topics to choose from was “Should women be allowed to serve on the front lines in combat?” I argued yes, they should be allowed to serve, and in the course of my research for the paper, I discovered some amazing women who fought right out on the front lines (in a capacity that makes my service look like summer camp) in various wars throughout history. Again though, I never in a million years imagined I would go to war myself one day.
I fully recognize the problems that come along with integrating women into the fighting force, and if there’s anywhere I could say personal freedoms should be trumped by big-picture concerns, it’s the military. Having said that, I feel the benefits of women serving alongside men balance out, if not outweigh, the problems. I think in the last 10 years, as you have pointed out, women have put to rest the question of whether or not we are capable. But I guess before I go any further, I should qualify exactly what the extent of my own service was.
I have often been asked, as a female vet, if I have ever been in a firefight (I think I will actually write a post about this someday because it’s a question that drives me crazy, but I digress!) The answer is no, I have never been in a firefight (and neither have most of the male soldiers I know). I have, however, come ridiculously close to getting blown up more than once. On one of those occasions, my team’s HMMWV was hit, but luckily we weren’t in it. It was parked on one side of a concrete barrier and we were on the other. On another occasion (that same week), my team and I hunkered down next to a concrete barrier that was our only cover in a rocket attack when I became so convinced we weren’t going to survive that I actually started saying the Our Father while one of my teammates yelled, as if the firing line could hear him, “Return fire! God damn it return fire!” (Ironically, he was a devout Mormon, and I had only changed my status from “no religion” to “Catholic” on my tags right before we deployed). The attack lasted long enough (I think it was 12 rockets in all) that I actually got through the whole prayer, and all there was left to do was wait. I found out later that evening that a soldier who was standing out in the open not too far away from us did loose his life in that attack, but my team and I were extremely fortunate, and none of us were injured. Overall, I consider myself very blessed. I was never really injured at all while in Iraq, and even though I made routine runs up and down one of the most dangerous highways in the country, my vehicle never hit an IED (roadside bomb).
I guess what I’m trying to say is that while I wouldn’t call myself a desk jokey, relatively speaking, there are many soldiers who endured far worse than what I did while in Iraq. There are countless women who have gone so far above and beyond what I ever did while serving. I have nothing but the deepest level of respect and greatest admiration for them. There are women who have been in firefights, who have been in vehicles that got blown up, who have lost limbs and of course even their lives. Having said that, most women (most soldiers for that matter) never go off the FOB (Forward Operating Base) or get to see what is beyond the gate while they are deployed. Towards the second half of my tour, I did frequently leave the FOB, and I was eventually tasked out to a tiny patrol base where I was the only female living with an artillery unit and the all-male Iraqi Army (there was one other female there when I first arrived, but she left shortly after I got there).
I volunteered for this assignment because the only other member of my team who could go just got back from a patrol base (these generally aren’t assignments people want, although it depends on the base and the soldier). If I had been a male soldier, there would have been no question I would have been automatically the next one up for the job. But because I was a female soldier, no one even considered sending me until I volunteered. I volunteered because it was completely unfair to send my teammate right back out again. This was considered the worst PB in our AO. It was a shitty mission nobody wanted, and it wasn’t right that no one was talking about sending me even though it was my turn for the shitty detail.
Even after I volunteered, we had to go through all kinds of levels of approval just to send me out. We weren’t sure I could go because there weren’t any separate accommodations for women on the base. There wasn’t really any kind of running water to speak of, but there was a shower closet that worked on and off. I would have to sleep in a connex (an empty shipping container) with the rest of my team (all guys) and make do the best I could with personal hygiene (lots of water-bottle showers!). I cannot tell you how many times in my pre-Army days I have gotten into arguments with guys over whether or not women belong in the Army and what those same guys would have said in those arguments if I proposed this situation to them! They would have said it’s impossible, it would never work, I would be raped, etc., etc. I even remember one guy once telling me women can’t be in combat because every ounce of weight counts and our tampons would weigh down the load. He was dead serious.
While I was stationed on the PB, I went out on patrols day and night (turns out the tampons really didn’t weigh that much after all). I walked in the footsteps of the guy in front of me because you never knew if you were going to step on a pressure plate IED. After several weeks of everybody on my team taking turns going out with different patrol teams, the unit I ended up being permanently assigned to requested me specifically because the team leader thought I was good at my job. Not only was I fully accepted, but I don’t feel like I was overprotected either (that was another argument I used to hear all the time). The reality is, there is almost nothing stronger than the bond between brothers in arms–not even the protective instincts men have towards women. I would say the only bond stronger than that between these men–men who off duty sometimes don’t even like each other but out on the line would take a bullet for each other–is the bond between mother and child. From my experience, I would say a female on the team is just another one of the guys.
I of course can’t speak for all similar situations, but everything I saw while I was over there jibes with that. I had another good friend who was one of the only females on a different patrol base. She had a similar experience. Our battalion included an MP (military police) company. When we first arrived in country, the men and the women in that company lived together in one giant tent (we all lived in giant tents the first few months, but the rest of us were split up into male and female tents). Someone higher up put the kibosh on that living arrangement pretty quick, but the unit was really upset about it. They were all very closely bonded, and living together solidifies that sense of being one team, one cohesive unit.
So okay, we can probably agree that women are capable, and we can be accepted, but what about the problems? The first question people always bring up is the differences in strength, but that part is easy. All soldiers need to be able to carry their own load. If they can’t, well, there is no “can’t”–they all do. My unit’s full combat load deploying to Iraq was 200lbs. No exaggeration. You carry approximately 90lbs on your back, 75lbs front loaded in a duffle, and another good 35lbs or so in gear and ammo. Now, this isn’t what you go out on mission with–it’s just what you lug around Kuwait and to the flight line in Baghdad and what you have to carry by yourself from the bird to your new home on the other side of the FOB, from tent to tent, bus to bus, etc. Every soldier, officer and enlisted, male and female, must carry their own load. Some women are stronger than others. Some make it through basic and advanced training with no problems at all. While I made sure I had high marks on every PT test and every other place it counted, the arches in my feet collapsed, and I ended up with some nasty stress fractures in both my legs. Because that’s an injury that typically takes 6 months of inactivity to heal, I just didn’t. I spent my whole time in the Army with stress fractures in my legs. My company 1st sergeant was worried I wouldn’t be able to deploy because of all the weight we had to carry just to get in country. I did deploy, and I carried my own load, and when I got to Iraq, my first week there I did a PT test that included a 2 mile run around the FOB in the desert before I became acclimated to the 120 degree heat. Yes, men are generally stronger than women, but so what. When it comes right down to it, we’re as strong as we need to be to get the job done.
The reality is yes, women get periods, and our periods do sometimes get in the way (both literally and metaphorically). Yes, the presence of women in an all male unit can create competition for her attention and attractions may develop. I met my husband on that patrol base. I’m not going to pretend that in itself wasn’t a problem in some ways. But I don’t know that in the absence of women that other problems don’t just fill in that space either. Men spending months on end together without any women in sight isn’t exactly a pretty sight!
So I feel like I’ve done all this rambling, and I haven’t even addressed your main point, which is that war is a dirty job–do we really want women doing it? This is where I think the personal freedom argument does come in. There are all kinds of reasons why maybe women shouldn’t be in the infantry just yet, and the concerns about women serving in combat are valid. But whether or not a woman should get her hands dirty, so to speak, ultimately has to be the choice of the woman. Many civilians laugh at the whole concept of the warrior ethos, but for even the most jaded soldier, it is very real. I know it probably sounds like a bunch of propaganda, especially to skeptics who think all the military does is brainwash people, but every soldier–no matter what their reasons for joining or how big a mistake they may have thought they made–has an understanding of what they’re capable of that most people will never get to experience in their lifetime. In some ways, a woman’s own natural protective instincts make her just as pre-disposed for soldiering as any man. For some women, the call to be a soldier is as powerful as a vocation to the church. And for me, the freedom to pursue that vocation is the very essence of America–it is what I believe Thomas Jefferson was talking about when he included The Pursuit of Happiness in the list of our inalienable rights (and what I think of when Christopher Gardner asks the question, “How did he know to put the pursuit part in there?”)
So I hope that kind of answers your question! I’m sorry my response was so crazy long! I’ll try to make the answers to your other questions a little more pointed. But I’m definitely curious what you think, and if what I said just left you with more questions than answers, please let me know! I’m pretty sure an actual post will follow this comment now, and if I realized it was going to be so long, I would have just created a post to answer the question in the first place! lol.
SW-This is an excellent response to my question, and I think it will make a great post. You write very passionately about this subject, and certainly have convinced me that a, you have the heart of a warrior “I did deploy, and I carried my own load, and when I got to Iraq, my first week there I did a PT test that included a 2 mile run around the FOB in the desert before I became acclimated to the 120 degree heat.”
That takes some “balls” so to speak…and b, some guys are still obviously retarded(do people still use the “period” argument?)
Now I gotta go to work again, I just wanted to stop by this mornin and do a quick read (I will be comin back fer more in depth and hope ya don’t mind a second reply) but this is very compelling, and does come close to answering my question (challenge lol) so I want to make sure I give it the attention it deserves.
But I mean Jebus woman, I lived a pretty rough and tumble life (as well as tough and rumble), so even though I wasn’t in the military I do appreciate what it takes to accomplish yer above sentence I copy/pasted and I gotta salute ya…
It proves at least part of my point, that there are women who can be soldiers, and at least on a couple quick perusals you may have convinced me that they not only can, but many , if so driven, should be…
Okay I do have some follow up questions before I concede my point however lol…but I promise to bring somethin better to the table than yer Aunt Flow
Okay wow, I’ll try to be concise. I will concede that woman can and obviously desire to serve on the front lines…but I’m still not convinced they should.
I wrote a long reply(like usual) but it somehow disappeared due to my fumbling fingers, so I’m gonna try to say the same thing in one third the words.
Again thanks fer the thoughtful comments and replies.
Due to some of the things I have done and experienced I have…lets say a residue. It is always with me. The way I learned to deal with that stuff is the same way I learned how to handle pain, the way I learned how to be a “man” (taught to me by my roofing boss & father figure) Ya wrap it up in a tight ball, cram it all into a tiny lil box marked feelings, wrap that whole box in duct tape then weigh it down with chains and shove it way down deep.
War is dirty, it takes a certain amount of distancing yerself from yer feelings to accomplish jobs.
And I know men have “feelings now” (omg it drives me crazy lolsidc) so many more men openly struggle with this residue issue today, than say world war II vets…but how do you find women vets doing who have been in extended fire fights? Women who had to accomplish some of the more dirty deeds associated with war? I know I am talking in super generalizations…but that simply means that it is in general true.
( I am just tryin to say that I know women can and do dirty deeds with-out war, but they are extremely few and far between, the rare Aileen Wuornos as compared to the numerous Ted Bundy’s)
So a normal woman, one who is suppose to have feelings, how do they handle that feeling, the feeling of tryin not to have feelings, does that make sense?
So and again I know the trash thing is a goofy analogy, but just ’cause ya can do a job, doesn’t mean you should, or that you feel you should have to just to prove yer equal to men
Lil’ Mouse having first argued against it (over and over I told her I knew she could take out the trash, carry in the groceries I just liked doing it for her) she has now learned to enjoy it and sometimes God bless her milk it for all it’s worth Think about it this way, I know you can do all the heavy dirty jobs yerself, but, know and be honest, isn’t it nice to have Mr. Spartan there to do it for you do it for ya.
And, at least from my perspective, there are very few jobs that men do better than woman, (hunting, killing, building and lifting, are about all I can think of lol)is it so bad that you girls are not the best at everything, I mean throw us a bone (so to speak, or do ya want that too!)
Anyway, imagine this is the short version, but of course, not as short as I planned settin out…God bless you and yers