If it's wrong, I've probably said it...
Reservist = 2-way street; Civilian = out of traffic
Published on November 8, 2004 By chiprj In Current Events
So, a few days back, I posted about a Reservist that was being activated and how he was surprised and didn't want to report. You can check it out here - Being A Reservist Is A Two-Way Street.

Well, I found this while surfing around the net - Kaua'i man sues over recall to active duty. Another guy trying to get out of being activated to serve in the Army. But there's a big difference here. and I totally support this man in his effort to fight being activated. Why? Well, this guy is a civilian. And has been for a long time.

It breaks down like this. He enlisted in 1987. He got out in 1991. He chose not to serve in the Reserves or National Guard, so for all intents and purposes he was out. According to standard Army contracts, after he finished his active duty, he was required to serve the remainder of 8 years in the Inactive Ready Reserve. This basically meant that he had the chance of being activated until some time in 1995 (the article reports 96, so maybe he had some delayed entry time at the end of 87 and didn't start his contract until 88), but he had no real requirements other than keep his address updated so that if the Army wanted to recall him, they'd be able to contact him.

What that all means is he's been free and clear of the Army for nearly 8 years now. He's a civilian. And yet, he received notification of the Army's desire to activate him. He's filed a suit to stop this and the Army has delayed his report date while they review the case.

My guess is he'll be let go with no incident once the Army admits this is an error. I mean, he is not under any contract or obligation here. Hopefully, for his sake (and that of his family), this will be resolved quickly.

Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Nov 09, 2004
Taking it in the rear is the Army way!
on Nov 09, 2004
I thought taking it in the rear was the British Navy's Way....
on Nov 09, 2004
Why, because if you had to serve, you'd be taking it in the rear?

Taking it in the rear is the Army way!

I thought taking it in the rear was the British Navy's Way....


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
on Nov 09, 2004
I thought the British Navy's way was the fine old tradition of anthropophagy.
on Nov 09, 2004
I thought the British Navy's way was the fine old tradition of anthropophagy.


In order to comment on your comment, I will first need to head over the merriam-webster.com...
on Nov 09, 2004
Cannibalism
on Nov 09, 2004
I thought the British Navy's way was the fine old tradition of anthropophagy.


In order to comment on your comment, I will first need to head over the merriam-webster.com...


Cannibalism


Got it! and ewwwww... and trueeeee....? HAHAHA! Makes me think of the old Monty Python bit where they were trying to decide whom to eat first...

"How long is it?"

"That's a personal question!"

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
on Nov 09, 2004
Well, what do you expect? They reactivated a 67 year old retiree earlier this summer, who had been out for 7 years after giving 41 years of his life to the service. You can read what i had to say about it here...Link


The difference with Ham (and this got under reported) is that his call up was voluntary on his part. He signed an agreement when he retired that he'd be willing to be recalled if necessary. When he got his first call up, he asked that they pass him over and try to find younger candidates. When the Army called back a few months later and told him that he was still needed, he agreed to be called up. All the quotes attributed to him (from what google tells me) have shown his willingness to be called up and serve again. It's unfortunate that the military wants him to return, in that it shows a marked absence of what should be a very necessary field to keep stocked. But he could have turned down the call up if he really wanted to.

As far as the draft goes... well, I don't think that it's a good idea. We have quality Soldiers because they volunteer and we can weed them out as appropriate. You start forcing people in and you deal with both quality issues and motivational problems. Conscription seems to work in South Korea, though. That's two and a half years less of molotav cocktail throwing at US bases for each male... you add it up and that's like a million years or something...
on Nov 11, 2004
Screw the paperwork, it sounds like the perfect time for him to rob a bank/smoke crack rocks/discover his closet homosexuality.

Well, his wife and (fairly) newborn daughter might not appreciate any of those things, but I see what you're saying.


Can't tell that any thought has been given to these ideas already, huh?
on Nov 11, 2004
This is becoming more common as the war in Iraq continues. My friend Todd was a ranger for 8 years and just finished his inactive ready status, received a letter similar to this. He told them to get bent, through his lawyer. They finally relented and told him it was a "mistake".

I guess "mistake" is an alternate term for "backdoor draft".
on Nov 11, 2004
I guess "mistake" is an alternate term for "backdoor draft".


I'd say that would only be an appropriate interpretation if it actually worked. I'm glad that your friend was able to get this worked out. If the paperwork for recalling IRR members is messed up even a fraction of how messed up paperwork is for things as simple as finance issues for active duty people, then there will probably be a lot of mistakes like this. It is unfortunate that people who are obviously done with their service have to go through this kind of pain and heartache.

Can't tell that any thought has been given to these ideas already, huh?


HAHAHA!!!! Hmmmm... maybe?
2 Pages1 2