Posted on Sep 13, 2019
Study explores the idea of allowing some military reservists to be non-deployable
2.04K
30
11
2
2
0
Yea.....oooooooooookay.
Study explores the idea of allowing some military reservists to be non-deployable
Posted from militarytimes.comPosted in these groups: 
Reserves
Deployment
Reserves Deployment
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 10
4
4
0
How about hell no! So we are going to lower the standards for some and put the workload (deployment part) on the lucky few that are deployable. That’s one hell of a way to burn out your combat troops and your service and support that move with the front line
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
Why??? I spent 23 years in the reserves, was called up 3 times, plus did two 3 months stints for Division on some internal training missions they were conducting. If you can't deploy should you be in the military anymore.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
I had to read the title more than twice to believe it!
This idea is wrong in so many ways, starting with the mentioned opinion regarding security.
The military needs non-deployable folks? Then convert those position to GS. No need to deploy for most instance and if they have to there is no need to be in top shape. I could be wrong but the bulk of cyber operations (defense and offence) do not required AOR presence.
Oh, wait, DOD do not want an increase on manpower. Guess what? fighting wars requires resources and the most important is its HUMAN RESOURCE!!!!!
But they still want a ready trained reserve force. Then maintain the standard and those willing to serve will keep on coming.
But the current pool of potential recruits is not fit to serve due to "whatever is the buzz word of the day". If they truly want to serve, they will. Want to motivate them? Do not shortchange reserve benefits. Let’s be honest, it doesn’t make sense to serve 20 years as a reservist, then retire and have to wait 23 years before receiving a small paycheck. How about paying that earned reserve pension right away? That will truly motivate folks to join and retain those already in.
This idea is wrong in so many ways, starting with the mentioned opinion regarding security.
The military needs non-deployable folks? Then convert those position to GS. No need to deploy for most instance and if they have to there is no need to be in top shape. I could be wrong but the bulk of cyber operations (defense and offence) do not required AOR presence.
Oh, wait, DOD do not want an increase on manpower. Guess what? fighting wars requires resources and the most important is its HUMAN RESOURCE!!!!!
But they still want a ready trained reserve force. Then maintain the standard and those willing to serve will keep on coming.
But the current pool of potential recruits is not fit to serve due to "whatever is the buzz word of the day". If they truly want to serve, they will. Want to motivate them? Do not shortchange reserve benefits. Let’s be honest, it doesn’t make sense to serve 20 years as a reservist, then retire and have to wait 23 years before receiving a small paycheck. How about paying that earned reserve pension right away? That will truly motivate folks to join and retain those already in.
(3)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Excellent points left and right sir! Especially the last one. I switched to the reserves for family reasons, just hit two years in this month, and a few months left on a deployment and I'm already talking to a recruiter about going back active. The reserves definitely has a role in the greater scheme of things. However, if I'm going to do 20, I might as well do it active and draw that pension upon retirement. At least pull it in 10 years from the 60* age to make it fair for those serving 20 on active.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google