Recruiting Slump "Worst in Decades"
So reports the Associated Press:
The Army is closing the books on one of the leanest recruiting years since it became an all-volunteer service three decades ago, missing its enlistment target by the largest margin since 1979 and raising questions about its plans for growth.Among the factors cited: "The daily reports of American deaths in Iraq and the uncertain nature of the struggle against the insurgency have put a damper on young people's enthusiasm for joining the military."
3 Comments:
But I thought we were winning the war on terra?
I recently discussed this with one of our visitors here.
For the first time, we are in uncharted waters with an all-volunteer military in a prolonged armed conflict. Those most likely to enlist will be the ones who, unlike their predecessors, will be better informed about the perils and consequences of joining in. It is not now perceived as a way to get a good education, occupational training, and a steady job.
In the face of an action that is surrounded by concerns about its motivation and goals, there will be fewer potential recruits. There must be faith and confidence in the leadership and the cause it represents. That is why the spotlight will inevitably turn toward those young people who have openly and vocally supported the administration and its war.
Some of them, someday, will stand before an electorate with the charge of justifying the choices they made.
This really is a new situation. The Army, btw, is the only branch missing its recruiting goals. Even the Marines have exceeded theirs. Reenlistment is meeting goals as well, among those who have been to Iraq and can anticipate orders to return.
Something in the report that some of you may not be aware of: When someone enlists in the military there is usually a significant delay between enlistment and departing for basic training. The Army, just like the other services, fills enlistment goals into the future. The Army usually has 25% ahead of time, and this has dropped to 5% (working from memory here.) Someone is bound to point out that this is more significant than the actual recruiting shortfalls. But we don't *know* what this means for the future behavior of potential recruits. Will, "You can leave in two weeks" encourage at least a few to enlist who might not have wanted to twiddle their thumbs for months?
I've been in this situation so it's not entirely theoretical for me. I know what my answer *was* and that was that I wanted on the plane soonest. Waiting is good for the service (they get to plan ahead) but it truely sucks for the person who just decided to enlist.
(And yes, anonymous, we're winning. But don't tell anyone. It's a *secret*.)
Post a Comment
Return to Facing South's main page