Army Retention Rate Is At 15% Above Goal

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Annie, Apr 10, 2006.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-04-09-army-re-enlistments_x.htm
     
  2. nosarcasm
    Offline

    nosarcasm Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    931
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Idaho
    Ratings:
    +68
    they lowered their goals to be able to meet them. The spin stops here.

    Its the Enron bookcooking government style. Oldest trick in the book.
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I've looked for something on this, can't find anything going back to 1999. What links do you have?
     
  4. nosarcasm
    Offline

    nosarcasm Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    931
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Idaho
    Ratings:
    +68
    I heard about that change of recruitment goals on NPR some time ago when they talked to recruiters about the problems they had achieving goal numbers.

    But you can find on the Defense department website the
    fact that the army National Guard is only up to 96% of endstrength.

    They miss 4% of their needed personnel.
    I couldn't find the army numbers either.

    I also wonder how the retention was counted before.

    With the economy solid, and the casualties in Iraq still making headlines it is
    just hard to attract many young people. They added more benefits latetely maybe it will help.

    The army has also stopped to demand more troops, now the taxpayer pays private companies triple for their security personnell.

    Its all part of the Iraq war politics.
     
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770

    I'm finding plenty of .gov stuff, just nothing that would back up 'fudging numbers'. Explanations of retention, including shortfalls on reserves are listed. The 15% # is army only:

    http://www.dod.gov/news/Jan2006/20060110_3893.html
    See also:

    http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache...gov&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=8&client=firefox-a

    http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache...ov&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=11&client=firefox-a
     
  6. nosarcasm
    Offline

    nosarcasm Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    931
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Idaho
    Ratings:
    +68
    while trying to find some more info something else became evident.

    Lots of newspapers just print the Ap Reports with no input or research on their own.

    There are a bunch of crazy leftwing sides out there that put their worthless propaganda out there.

    I ll try to find out more.
     
  7. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    That's why I wanted to stick with .gov sites. While I'm surely not saying they couldn't 'revise' numbers, they are pretty good at keeping the information before and after available. Just not finding what I thought you were saying in your first response.
     
  8. nosarcasm
    Offline

    nosarcasm Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    931
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Idaho
    Ratings:
    +68
    me neither. so I have to find it or concede.
     
  9. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    NPR is not a reliable news source. You might want to recheck your facts.
     
  10. nosarcasm
    Offline

    nosarcasm Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    931
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Idaho
    Ratings:
    +68
    I found something in the Washington Post

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/10/AR2006041001254.html

    The Army has set a mission for fiscal 2006, which ends on September 30, of sending 80,000 recruits into boot camp, the same goal that it missed by more than 6,600 in fiscal 2005.

    In March, the Army got 5,396 new recruits, topping its goal of 5,200, the 10th month in a row it has exceeded its monthly target.

    But the Army partly owes its success in reaching those goals to the fact that it reduced its monthly targets for six of the first eight months of fiscal 2006. That means most of its recruiting must occur from June through September, when the monthly goals are all much higher than last year's.
     

Share This Page