Soldier Exercises Free Speech-Gets Arrested

[CurveLight]

However when representing yourself as a member of the military and saying these things it is no longer considered protected speech. It is considered mutiny at the extreme edge and derelection of duty/failure to maintain good order and dicipline at the least.

He didn't do the song to represent the military. He did it to represent himself in protest for being forced to stay in the military a full year past his contract.

His contract was for 8 YEARS. 4 on active duty and 4 more where he could be CALLED to active DUTY. Guess what? They called him. You may want to actually learn what you are talking about before you sound off like an idiot.

It's always funny when people like yourself make assumptions them do a little soap box parade based o your owm ignorance. If you had paid attention at all to the thread you would know I'm aware of the IRR. Maybe you don't have the balls to be honest about it but I know for the longest time it was commonly understood the chances of being called up on IRR were very slim. Many Troops, over 180,000 have been hit with Stop Loss. I'm not complaining about the program itself. I'm saying all soldiers should share in the responsibility. Instead of doing a stop loss on all active duty we should rotate a certain percentage of the RR. Why only activate those on active duty? Why not hold the RRs accountable for their obligation?



(btw, did you ever come to terms with the fact it was the CPA that gave Blackwater full immunity and not any Treaty with Iraq? Yeah. It pisses me off when you bitch up and down about being informed but refuse to admit when you are guilty of ignorance. I'll call you out every time.)

 

[CurveLight]

Yes. Here's why. No one forced the soldier to volunteer and sign the contract of enlistment. He should have read the fine print.

By that logic there should be no safety laws in a workplace. If people voluntarily show up for work then their employer can have any kind of conditions they want. It doesn't matter it is a volunteer military. That does not change the purpose of the question.

When you sign the contract, you have given up most free speech rights.

Much of it falls under the category of insubordination.

This is about your sig. Wtf is wrong with you? Someone has already done what your sig suggests. Why don't you write Jim Adkisson and thank him? I'm sure you can get the address of the prison where he now lives. If you have any time left over you can send a letter to the church where he specifically murdered Democrats and tell them that adkisson was just trying to save america. He specifically said he killed them to save America, just like your sig. You got the balls to stand behind your sick sig tag or not?

Jim Adkisson read books by Savage, O'reilly and Hannity! | NowPublic News Coverage

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Stop lossed soldiers are kept past their original active duty time. That means if someone signed up for four years and they are stop lossed they are kept on active duty beyond their original contract.

My point about the IRR is this: all of us who joined and served are bound by the IRR commitment no less than those still on active duty. At last check there were over 180,000 soldiers forced to stay on active duty. Why not use the IRR for rotation instead of stressing troops out on repeated deployments? All soldiers should share in the rotation. Why do you want to let IRR out of their commitment but hold active duty soldiers to theirs? As far as risking losing civilian jobs, so what? As many have pointed out all Soldiers are bound to their contracts and that includes the IRR. Furthermore, Federal law states they cannot lose their job. Once they are done serving their IRR time the company must reinstate them at their previous salary and same position or a lateral move in the position.

First of all....many of the IRR soldiers have been off active duty for a while and have jobs in the civilian sector. You can't just uproot them and send them off to war. They don't meet the criteria for remobilization. The General's in charge of the Reserve Forces don't pay much attention to left wing whining points and stupid movies about stop loss.

The IRR doesn't meet the criteria for remobilization? Have you shared this information with the Pentagon and DOD? They could use an obviously genius military adviser. Why do you think the IRR exists?

As for Stop Loss....once again you prove to put your partisan agenda above all else. Conservatives (not neocons and their supporters) as well as Liberals are against Stop Loss. The problem with people like you is not having the first damn clue how to defend your positions so you avoid defending them on their own merits and instead choose to demonize dissenters. That way you can avoid revealing your own inability for the debate while also not addressing points made by others. It's stale.

Your bluring the line between READY RESERVE and IRR....IRR's DO NOT DRILL and therefore are at the bottom of the list UNLESS they volunteer to be re-instated to active duty.

READY RESERVISTS ARE WEEKEND WARRIORS AND DRILL! The services will TAKE THEM before re-activating an IRR. Read the USA Today article.
You should really try to get your facts straight before posting.

 

[geauxtohell]

I served way more than two years but I did get out before my five year original contract was over because I tool advantage of the military draw down under Clinton. The IRR time might have been increased as a condition under the draw down. I can't remember for sure.

The army has about 115,000 IRR soldiers. Out of that group how many have been activated?

These were the only numbers I could find:

As of March 2009, the US Army had recalled 26,954 ready reservists since September 11, 2001. Of those, 10,592 requested exemptions of which 6,352 were granted.[8]

That's from a USA Today article (redirect from a wiki article).

In my anecdotal experience (FWIW), I have my doubts. Like I said, virtually everyone I know in the IRR has been recalled. I would put money that the bulk of those 27K are soldiers who still have an obligation (and have been recently discharged).

In fact, I would corroborate that with Army Policy where an IRR soldier past their obligation can simply opt out of involuntary mobilization (which mandates their release from the IRR).

Ready Reservists are DRILLING reservists....not IRR.

USA Today screwed up the quote, but the numbers are for the IRR. You can check it out at the wiki page for the IRR if you are curious.

 

[CurveLight]

First of all....many of the IRR soldiers have been off active duty for a while and have jobs in the civilian sector. You can't just uproot them and send them off to war. They don't meet the criteria for remobilization. The General's in charge of the Reserve Forces don't pay much attention to left wing whining points and stupid movies about stop loss.

The IRR doesn't meet the criteria for remobilization? Have you shared this information with the Pentagon and DOD? They could use an obviously genius military adviser. Why do you think the IRR exists?

As for Stop Loss....once again you prove to put your partisan agenda above all else. Conservatives (not neocons and their supporters) as well as Liberals are against Stop Loss. The problem with people like you is not having the first damn clue how to defend your positions so you avoid defending them on their own merits and instead choose to demonize dissenters. That way you can avoid revealing your own inability for the debate while also not addressing points made by others. It's stale.

Your bluring the line between READY RESERVE and IRR....IRR's DO NOT DRILL and therefore are at the bottom of the list UNLESS they volunteer to be re-instated to active duty.

READY RESERVISTS ARE WEEKEND WARRIORS AND DRILL! The services will TAKE THEM before re-activating an IRR. Read the USA Today article.
You should really try to get your facts straight before posting.

"The Ready Reserve consists of the Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve and Inactive National Guard."
Military.com Resources

"The Ready Reserve consists of the Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve and Inactive National Guard."
Military.com Resources

"The Ready Reserve consists of the Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve and Inactive National Guard."
Military.com Resources

"The Ready Reserve consists of the Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve and Inactive National Guard."
Military.com Resources

"The Ready Reserve consists of the Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve and Inactive National Guard."
Military.com Resources

"The Ready Reserve consists of the Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve and Inactive National Guard."
Military.com Resources

"The Ready Reserve consists of the Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve and Inactive National Guard."
Military.com Resources

"The Ready Reserve consists of the Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve and Inactive National Guard."
Military.com Resources

You are the one confusing the Army Reserves (who Drill) versus the Ready Reserves who are defined by the above link.

 

[CurveLight]

These were the only numbers I could find:



That's from a USA Today article (redirect from a wiki article).

In my anecdotal experience (FWIW), I have my doubts. Like I said, virtually everyone I know in the IRR has been recalled. I would put money that the bulk of those 27K are soldiers who still have an obligation (and have been recently discharged).

In fact, I would corroborate that with Army Policy where an IRR soldier past their obligation can simply opt out of involuntary mobilization (which mandates their release from the IRR).

Ready Reservists are DRILLING reservists....not IRR.

USA Today screwed up the quote, but the numbers are for the IRR. You can check it out at the wiki page for the IRR if you are curious.

The numbers are extremely thin so I don't understand why you said the IRR was being heavily leaned on. Not a big dea either way.

I find it interesting the Soldier mailed his song to the Pentagon last July but only gets arrested for it when he protests his deployment.

 

[geauxtohell]

I don't see how that's leaning heavily into the RR, even with your anecdotal evidence. They have been eligible for immediate recall ever since Bush declared a national emergency. My feeling is they have been avoiding recalls as much as possible because the more you can keep the costs of the occupations contained the easier it is to maintain with little interference. Basically, we are too selfish as a nation to care what active duty troops experience but if you implemented a pseudo-draft that would effect a lot of civilians that would then put pressure on the Policy. From my understanding the Draft is what ended vietnam.

Actually, you've hit on something here. The reason that the Reserves and Guard has been so heavily leaned on in the War On Terror is that Creighton Abrams' designed the "Total Army" concept in a manner where entry into combat would mandate using the Reserves and Guard. By General Abrams estimation, pulling soldiers out of civilian life would make war so controversial that the President wouldn't be so quick to get us into combat. It obviously backfired.

We can agree to disagree on the IRR. I just have anecdotes, but in my experience IRR soldiers have been heavily leaned on. And out of those soldiers, the ones who still have an obligation remaining have been getting the short shaft.

Either way, I suspect that even if this E-4 would have been released, he would have been recalled on the IRR.

 

[geauxtohell]

It's always funny when people like yourself make assumptions them do a little soap box parade based o your owm ignorance. If you had paid attention at all to the thread you would know I'm aware of the IRR. Maybe you don't have the balls to be honest about it but I know for the longest time it was commonly understood the chances of being called up on IRR were very slim. Many Troops, over 180,000 have been hit with Stop Loss. I'm not complaining about the program itself. I'm saying all soldiers should share in the responsibility. Instead of doing a stop loss on all active duty we should rotate a certain percentage of the RR. Why only activate those on active duty? Why not hold the RRs accountable for their obligation?

Except the IRR is being called up already. A lot. There are regulations that only allow a certain number of IRR soldiers to be called up at a time, but I have a feeling the numbers are being fudged. I can't back that up, again, I just have my anecdotal evidence.

I could see a propensity to utilize stop loss before involuntary mobilization in that you don't have to spend the time and money to retrain soldiers (IRR soldiers have been being reclassed into civil affairs) and AD soldiers are already in shape, etc.

Either way, I think it's all bullshit. However, again, the bulk of the IRR consists of people who have done combat tours.

I also think that one reason the stop loss numbers are so high is that entire units are stop lossed and stop moved prior to deployment.

It's all bullshit IMO, but believe it or not, it got a lot better under Gates (who at least gives a shit about soldiers). Under Rumsfeld it was a fucking trainwreck.

That's not to mention all the other pressure the Army puts on soldiers to try and coerce them to stay in. When I got back from A-stan, as an Infantry O-3, I had to out-process and talk to some tabless 2LT with no combat patch who tried to read me the riot act in order to get me go into a Reserve Unit or else I would be "involuntarily mobilized".

I just laughed at his sorry ass and told him that maybe he should consider volunteering for some time in the sandbox before trying intimidate those of us that had just gotten back.

 

[geauxtohell]

The services will TAKE THEM before re-activating an IRR. Read the USA Today article.
You should really try to get your facts straight before posting.

I have my doubts. Ready Reservists are part of units. So if the unit is deployed, they whole unit goes. They are part of the regular OPTEMPO. IRR soldiers are used as individual augmentees to fill units that are short staffed and get the "hey you" call up.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

What I'm driving at is Ready Reserves already drill once a month and for 2 weeks...whereas IRR members finished their active duty time and are just finishing out their contract without drilling or any contact with the military. Now if there was a critical specialty( i.e. SEAL, EOD, Special Forces, Medic/Corpsman) that required them to be recalled that's a different story. The services would call a RR drilling reservist to active duty because it would be cheaper and then if the necessary specialties still weren't filled, they tap the IRR's.

 

[geauxtohell]

What I'm driving at is Ready Reserves already drill once a month and for 2 weeks...whereas IRR members finished their active duty time and are just finishing out their contract without drilling or any contact with the military. Now if there was a critical specialty( i.e. SEAL, EOD, Special Forces, Medic/Corpsman) that required them to be recalled that's a different story. The services would call a RR drilling reservist to active duty because it would be cheaper and then if the necessary specialties still weren't filled, they tap the IRR's.

No offense, but I don't think you guys can take your experience with the IRR/Ready Reserves and compare it to what is going on now (assuming you got out before 2001).

It's all a completely different animal. There certainly is no safe haven in the IRR.

Also, as an aside, I don't think SF can be recalled out of the IRR. I had an SF buddy tell me that.

MOS used to be in important factor in IRR call up for critical skills. It's not really that way anymore. It's just used to augment units that are short handed.

While the Army has a right to do that under the contract, I wish it would implement a similar policy that the Marine Corps has where every Marine has to deploy. No hiding out there. The Army might be too big and bureaucratic for that to work properly, I don't know.

I know those of us in the IRR were aggravated that a large percentage of the active Army receiving a paycheck (I want to say close to 50%) has never deployed.

As you pointed out, soldiers in the IRR have left the military and are out in the civilian world. Uprooting them really has the penchant to screw their life up. The Army served me with involuntary mobilization orders in the middle of finals in my second semester of Medical School. They could have cared less that I was in Medical School. My only saving grace was that they wanted me to report to Benning in March and my MSO was up in July, which means I would have deployed for one year past my contractual obligation. When I pointed that out, I was told it was all a mistake.

 

[Navy1960]

September 24, 2001
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has delegated his "stop-loss" authority to the heads of the military departments. The stop-loss program allows the Services to retain individuals on active duty beyond their date of separation. Those affected by the order generally cannot retire or leave the service as long as reserves are called to active duty or until relieved by the President, whichever is earlier.

Defense.gov News Release: DOD AUTHORIZES STOP LOSS


From the Article:

Hall, who joined the Army in 2006, was arrested by military authorities in December before his unit deployed.

This Soldier obviously knew of the policy prior to his enlistment and as such he has no leg to stand on here.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

What I'm driving at is Ready Reserves already drill once a month and for 2 weeks...whereas IRR members finished their active duty time and are just finishing out their contract without drilling or any contact with the military. Now if there was a critical specialty( i.e. SEAL, EOD, Special Forces, Medic/Corpsman) that required them to be recalled that's a different story. The services would call a RR drilling reservist to active duty because it would be cheaper and then if the necessary specialties still weren't filled, they tap the IRR's.

No offense, but I don't think you guys can take your experience with the IRR/Ready Reserves and compare it to what is going on now (assuming you got out before 2001).

It's all a completely different animal. There certainly is no safe haven in the IRR.

Also, as an aside, I don't think SF can be recalled out of the IRR. I had an SF buddy tell me that.

MOS used to be in important factor in IRR call up for critical skills. It's not really that way anymore. It's just used to augment units that are short handed.

While the Army has a right to do that under the contract, I wish it would implement a similar policy that the Marine Corps has where every Marine has to deploy. No hiding out there. The Army might be too big and bureaucratic for that to work properly, I don't know.

I know those of us in the IRR were aggravated that a large percentage of the active Army receiving a paycheck (I want to say close to 50%) has never deployed.

As you pointed out, soldiers in the IRR have left the military and are out in the civilian world. Uprooting them really has the penchant to screw their life up. The Army served me with involuntary mobilization orders in the middle of finals in my second semester of Medical School. They could have cared less that I was in Medical School. My only saving grace was that they wanted me to report to Benning in March and my MSO was up in July, which means I would have deployed for one year past my contractual obligation. When I pointed that out, I was told it was all a mistake.

Good points and I did in fact retire in 1998. I am in the Fleet Reserve and in January of 2002 I received a letter from the Navy stating that my SPECWAR NEC was critical and I was to be recalled to active duty. As it turned out my civilian job with DoD was critical as well so I received an exemption.

 

[geauxtohell]

What I'm driving at is Ready Reserves already drill once a month and for 2 weeks...whereas IRR members finished their active duty time and are just finishing out their contract without drilling or any contact with the military. Now if there was a critical specialty( i.e. SEAL, EOD, Special Forces, Medic/Corpsman) that required them to be recalled that's a different story. The services would call a RR drilling reservist to active duty because it would be cheaper and then if the necessary specialties still weren't filled, they tap the IRR's.

No offense, but I don't think you guys can take your experience with the IRR/Ready Reserves and compare it to what is going on now (assuming you got out before 2001).

It's all a completely different animal. There certainly is no safe haven in the IRR.

Also, as an aside, I don't think SF can be recalled out of the IRR. I had an SF buddy tell me that.

MOS used to be in important factor in IRR call up for critical skills. It's not really that way anymore. It's just used to augment units that are short handed.

While the Army has a right to do that under the contract, I wish it would implement a similar policy that the Marine Corps has where every Marine has to deploy. No hiding out there. The Army might be too big and bureaucratic for that to work properly, I don't know.

I know those of us in the IRR were aggravated that a large percentage of the active Army receiving a paycheck (I want to say close to 50%) has never deployed.

As you pointed out, soldiers in the IRR have left the military and are out in the civilian world. Uprooting them really has the penchant to screw their life up. The Army served me with involuntary mobilization orders in the middle of finals in my second semester of Medical School. They could have cared less that I was in Medical School. My only saving grace was that they wanted me to report to Benning in March and my MSO was up in July, which means I would have deployed for one year past my contractual obligation. When I pointed that out, I was told it was all a mistake.

Good points and I did in fact retire in 1998. I am in the Fleet Reserve and in January of 2002 I received a letter from the Navy stating that my SPECWAR NEC was critical and I was to be recalled to active duty. As it turned out my civilian job with DoD was critical as well so I received an exemption.

I know most of us were assed off at the prospect of being forced into the Civil Affairs Branch, which is what happened to IRR soldiers wholesale. I don't want to offend any CA people on here, but I've never seen such mickey mouse tactical stupidity as displayed by the CA units in our AO (the reserve ones, not AD, which belongs to Special Operations). I was an infantryman, if I had to go back, I at least wanted to do the job I had trained to do and be with people who I know weren't going to get me killed or maimed with straight ineptness.

The Army puts way too much value on the the CA branch. What they should do, is have maneuver units train for CA as part of the mission essential tasks and outsource it to the Combat Arms units that have more mobility, gear, training, and resources. It's not rocket science. That's just my opinion and off topic at that.

 

[CurveLight]

What I'm driving at is Ready Reserves already drill once a month and for 2 weeks...whereas IRR members finished their active duty time and are just finishing out their contract without drilling or any contact with the military. Now if there was a critical specialty( i.e. SEAL, EOD, Special Forces, Medic/Corpsman) that required them to be recalled that's a different story. The services would call a RR drilling reservist to active duty because it would be cheaper and then if the necessary specialties still weren't filled, they tap the IRR's.

Ready Reserves do not drill. I believe I posted the link more than once that defined the RR. I see you conveniently ignored that. You fucked up. Admit it and move on.

 

[CurveLight]

September 24, 2001
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has delegated his "stop-loss" authority to the heads of the military departments. The stop-loss program allows the Services to retain individuals on active duty beyond their date of separation. Those affected by the order generally cannot retire or leave the service as long as reserves are called to active duty or until relieved by the President, whichever is earlier.

Defense.gov News Release: DOD AUTHORIZES STOP LOSS


From the Article:

Hall, who joined the Army in 2006, was arrested by military authorities in December before his unit deployed.

This Soldier obviously knew of the policy prior to his enlistment and as such he has no leg to stand on here.

You don't seem to understand what is happening. He didn't get arrested for refusing to deploy. He got arrested for a song he sent to the Pentagon in July 09'. Someone is exploiting the Ft Hood shooting to try and keep it quiet that stop loss is having a very negative reaction. Putting Hall's song in the centerpiece is a way of demonizing him so the pro war crowd can say he's a nutbag so it doesn't matter what he says. I agree he should follow his commitment but from my view that would mean protesting deployment due to an illegal occupation. If it was a legit conflict I wouldn't support his protesting at all.

 

[geauxtohell]

September 24, 2001
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has delegated his "stop-loss" authority to the heads of the military departments. The stop-loss program allows the Services to retain individuals on active duty beyond their date of separation. Those affected by the order generally cannot retire or leave the service as long as reserves are called to active duty or until relieved by the President, whichever is earlier.

Defense.gov News Release: DOD AUTHORIZES STOP LOSS


From the Article:

Hall, who joined the Army in 2006, was arrested by military authorities in December before his unit deployed.

This Soldier obviously knew of the policy prior to his enlistment and as such he has no leg to stand on here.

You don't seem to understand what is happening. He didn't get arrested for refusing to deploy. He got arrested for a song he sent to the Pentagon in July 09'. Someone is exploiting the Ft Hood shooting to try and keep it quiet that stop loss is having a very negative reaction. Putting Hall's song in the centerpiece is a way of demonizing him so the pro war crowd can say he's a nutbag so it doesn't matter what he says. I agree he should follow his commitment but from my view that would mean protesting deployment due to an illegal occupation. If it was a legit conflict I wouldn't support his protesting at all.

And back on topic. We all know we forfeit certain constitutional rights by joining the military. We submit to be under the UCMJ. This has always been supported by our civil courts. Soldiers can fight the UCMJ, insist on a court martial, and then appeal until eventually their case lands in civil court, but civil courts have always been tentative to step over the UCMJ and usually the situation has to be pretty egregious. As recent evidence of this, you can look up the case of CPT Connie Rhodes who refused to deploy b/c she claimed B.O. wasn't the legitimate CINC. The case went to federal court and the judge tossed it so quickly it made CPT Rhodes' head spin.

Saying you are going to grease your chain of command is certainly insubordination, and after Ft. Hood, the Army isn't going to mess around with this shit. Can you imagine what would happen if they ignored this and he actually did try and shoot his chain of command?

I don't blame him for being pissed, but I don't have much sympathy for the way he went about airing his grievances. Call me skeptical, but I am suspicious that he is trying to play the "crazy" card to get out of deployment. His unit is already in the box and he's sitting in the clink for this.

 

[CurveLight]

September 24, 2001
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has delegated his "stop-loss" authority to the heads of the military departments. The stop-loss program allows the Services to retain individuals on active duty beyond their date of separation. Those affected by the order generally cannot retire or leave the service as long as reserves are called to active duty or until relieved by the President, whichever is earlier.

Defense.gov News Release: DOD AUTHORIZES STOP LOSS


From the Article:

Hall, who joined the Army in 2006, was arrested by military authorities in December before his unit deployed.

This Soldier obviously knew of the policy prior to his enlistment and as such he has no leg to stand on here.

You don't seem to understand what is happening. He didn't get arrested for refusing to deploy. He got arrested for a song he sent to the Pentagon in July 09'. Someone is exploiting the Ft Hood shooting to try and keep it quiet that stop loss is having a very negative reaction. Putting Hall's song in the centerpiece is a way of demonizing him so the pro war crowd can say he's a nutbag so it doesn't matter what he says. I agree he should follow his commitment but from my view that would mean protesting deployment due to an illegal occupation. If it was a legit conflict I wouldn't support his protesting at all.

And back on topic. We all know we forfeit certain constitutional rights by joining the military. We submit to be under the UCMJ. This has always been supported by our civil courts. Soldiers can fight the UCMJ, insist on a court martial, and then appeal until eventually their case lands in civil court, but civil courts have always been tentative to step over the UCMJ and usually the situation has to be pretty egregious. As recent evidence of this, you can look up the case of CPT Connie Rhodes who refused to deploy b/c she claimed B.O. wasn't the legitimate CINC. The case went to federal court and the judge tossed it so quickly it made CPT Rhodes' head spin.

Saying you are going to grease your chain of command is certainly insubordination, and after Ft. Hood, the Army isn't going to mess around with this shit. Can you imagine what would happen if they ignored this and he actually did try and shoot his chain of command?

I don't blame him for being pissed, but I don't have much sympathy for the way he went about airing his grievances. Call me skeptical, but I am suspicious that he is trying to play the "crazy" card to get out of deployment. His unit is already in the box and he's sitting in the clink for this.

We don't know if he said he was going to grease his COC. Let's put a little gritty reality in here. We both know there are times people have gotten so mad they say dumb shit but they don't literally mean it. We also know in a Unit it is not super difficult to create a snitch or two if the price is right.

What we do know for a fact is he made the song and sent it to the Pentagon. As a result he had to see his COC. They let 6 months go by then suddenly decide he is a danger because of the song? It's just a coincidence they arrest him for the song at the same time he protests deployment?

 

[Navy1960]

September 24, 2001
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has delegated his "stop-loss" authority to the heads of the military departments. The stop-loss program allows the Services to retain individuals on active duty beyond their date of separation. Those affected by the order generally cannot retire or leave the service as long as reserves are called to active duty or until relieved by the President, whichever is earlier.

Defense.gov News Release: DOD AUTHORIZES STOP LOSS


From the Article:

Hall, who joined the Army in 2006, was arrested by military authorities in December before his unit deployed.

This Soldier obviously knew of the policy prior to his enlistment and as such he has no leg to stand on here.

You don't seem to understand what is happening. He didn't get arrested for refusing to deploy. He got arrested for a song he sent to the Pentagon in July 09'. Someone is exploiting the Ft Hood shooting to try and keep it quiet that stop loss is having a very negative reaction. Putting Hall's song in the centerpiece is a way of demonizing him so the pro war crowd can say he's a nutbag so it doesn't matter what he says. I agree he should follow his commitment but from my view that would mean protesting deployment due to an illegal occupation. If it was a legit conflict I wouldn't support his protesting at all.

I do understand, that is the exact reason I posted what I did, to show that this young man knew exactly what he was doing when he sent that song and should have known what to expect in the form of disciplne for doing so. We won't go back through the debate over Free Speech in the military as you seem to know there is none. So what this boils down to is a young man that has violated the UCMJ and because he feels that the "stop-loss" policy is unfair that somehow gives him a right to override the UCMJ and exercise and freedom he clearly does not have. If he had wanted this Freedom in the first place Curve, or desired it, or was opposed to the DoD's policy on "stop-loss" then I suggest he should not have walked into the Recruiters office 5 years after its implementation and joined the Army in the first place.

 

[CurveLight]

September 24, 2001
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has delegated his "stop-loss" authority to the heads of the military departments. The stop-loss program allows the Services to retain individuals on active duty beyond their date of separation. Those affected by the order generally cannot retire or leave the service as long as reserves are called to active duty or until relieved by the President, whichever is earlier.

Defense.gov News Release: DOD AUTHORIZES STOP LOSS


From the Article:

Hall, who joined the Army in 2006, was arrested by military authorities in December before his unit deployed.

This Soldier obviously knew of the policy prior to his enlistment and as such he has no leg to stand on here.

You don't seem to understand what is happening. He didn't get arrested for refusing to deploy. He got arrested for a song he sent to the Pentagon in July 09'. Someone is exploiting the Ft Hood shooting to try and keep it quiet that stop loss is having a very negative reaction. Putting Hall's song in the centerpiece is a way of demonizing him so the pro war crowd can say he's a nutbag so it doesn't matter what he says. I agree he should follow his commitment but from my view that would mean protesting deployment due to an illegal occupation. If it was a legit conflict I wouldn't support his protesting at all.

I do understand, that is the exact reason I posted what I did, to show that this young man knew exactly what he was doing when he sent that song and should have known what to expect in the form of disciplne for doing so. We won't go back through the debate over Free Speech in the military as you seem to know there is none. So what this boils down to is a young man that has violated the UCMJ and because he feels that the "stop-loss" policy is unfair that somehow gives him a right to override the UCMJ and exercise and freedom he clearly does not have. If he had wanted this Freedom in the first place Curve, or desired it, or was opposed to the DoD's policy on "stop-loss" then I suggest he should not have walked into the Recruiters office 5 years after its implementation and joined the Army in the first place.

If the song was such a problem why did they wait six months to arrest him for it? Clearly he was not a danger to himself or his unit as he was cleared by his COC and a Psych eval after he sent the song.