August Dombrow

22 April 2009

Topic: Military Stop-Loss Policy in the Context of the Global War on Terror Specific Purpose: To propose a solution to the stop-loss menace and incite civil unrest. Introduction: I. Attention-getter: Current stop-loss policy employs legal obfuscation in order to exploit a policy intended to protect our nation by maintaining the militarys combat effectiveness in times of national crisis. Such methods are deceitful and a discredit to those who serve as well as citizens who should remain informed in matters of national security (especially when/if foreign policy actually threatens the safety of American citizens). II. Thesis: Stop-loss can be maintained as a last resort option but will require changes that clarify the policy and provide civilian oversight. III. Preview of main points: Stop-loss serves a legitimate purpose, and my proposition would protect soldiers from its excesses while preserving the program by amending the existing language. Changes would consist of two areas current implementation lacks: Transparency/Education and Oversight/Accountability. Body: I. Transparency and Education A. Because such a small population is affected, the practice goes largely ignored by the majority. But 170,000 new soldiers enlisted last year (Army) and more will do so as the military increases in size. My proposal would: 1. Protect potential recruits from manipulative recruiter practices and ensure they are aware of the full ramifications of the contract (DD From 4/1) they sign. 2. Raise awareness amongst voters, protecting soldiers from questionable application of the policy by holding elected decision-makers accountable. II. Oversight and Accountability A. Implementation of stop-loss has gone unchecked since the onset of the Global War on Terror (doubling in just the past two years (Tyson)), so information alone would not likely curb it. 1. My proposal would guarantee citizen interest by attaching the policy to the military draft, limiting usage to times of genuine threats to national security. Conclusion: I. By combining education with incentive, this policy would offer the genuine and sincere change that recent abuse of stop-loss policy demands, providing a national watchdog against future exploitation. Anything short of this outcome would betray the nations military.

Works Cited Army Exceed Recruiting Goal for Fiscal Year 2008. U.S. Army. 10 October 2008. <http://www.army.mil/-newsreleases/2008/10/10/13228-army-exceed-recruiting-goal-for-fiscalyear-2008/> Authority of President to suspend certain laws relating to promotion, retirement, and separation. Title 10 U.S. Code, 1209. 2000 ed. Brook, Tom Vanden. DoD Data: More Forced to Stay in Army. USA Today. 23 April 2008. <http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2008-04-21-stoploss_N.htm> Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States. DD Form 4/1, Jan 2001. Niedbalski, Brian. Personal Interview. 21 March 2009. Phung, John. Personal Interview. 22 March 2009. Robinson, Zeb. Personal Interview. 22 March 2009. Shanker, Thom. Stop-Loss Will All but End by 2011, Gates Says. The New York Times. 18 March 2009. <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/washington/19gates.html?scp=3&sq= stop%20loss&st=cse> Soldiers of Misfortune: Abusive U.S. Military Recruitment and Failure to Protect Child Soldiers. American Civil Liberties Union. 13 May 2008. <http://www.aclu.org/intlhumanrights/gen/35245pub20080513.html> Tyson, Ann. Army to Phase Out 'Stop-Loss' Practice. The Washington Post. 19 March 2009. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/18 /AR2009031802504.html?wprss=rss_print/asection>