Is stop-loss an unethical and immoral trick played upon soldiers by the government?

Not a trick.

I was required to read and initial the paragraph that discussed stop-loss when I first enlisted.

After 9/11 I spent 4 years on one form of 'stop-loss' status or another.

In fact the first time I was placed on 'stop-loss' my ETS date was changed to my 60th birthday!

BTW - have you ever served? Or are you just a whiner?

All enlistments contain an 8 year contract. Active + Inactive = 8 years. My son was discharged, medically, after the Persian Gulf in 1995. He has a 25% Service disability. Therefore he had no time left...done. in 2001, he received a call from Marine Corps Headquarters, that they wanted him to return as in instructor. His MOS was Marine Security / Anti- Terrorism. He was never summoned. even though he said he would if called. So even when you are done, they may still re-call you, generally due to Specialized MOS, if needed.

Every enlistee is aware of these things, not a surprise to them at all

What's really more wrong is people signing a contract and not reading it. It's there in black and white. From what I've seen the stop loss is sometimes used to the troops advantages, that is those career troops. Just so you know, I'm proud that you are a civilian. Soldiers don't *****, we protect rights so that you can. Keep the b!tching going, you are very well at it.

It happened in WW2, but they didn't use a nice politically correct term. It happens in peace time, also. It was known as an OPERATIONAL HOLD, aka NEEDS OF THE SERVICE.

"STOP-LOSS" is not even grammatically correct. Sounds like a hair product for balding men!

It's not a fun thing to happen, but if you're a REAL MAN, you'll quit crying like a 5 year old. WA WA WA.

(USN, retired/in-country Viet Nam vet)

Stop-loss is designed to keep trained personnel on active duty after they return from war zones so there will be a ready pool of experienced professional service people at the ready. The alternative is to draft and train you which would be very time consuming and really ruffle your feathers.

It is unfair but it is neccasary due to the democratic leadership of this country downsizing the military after the cold war, now that we are figting a two front war we don't have enough troops to fight in both afghanastan iraq, keep the borders of this nation safe, and keep up our millitary commitments elsewhere in the world.

Its neither trick, unethical nor immoral. When you sign the dotted line and take the oath of enlistment, you are told in clear, concise language that you are going to get what you ask for in terms of training and period of service, so long as it is in the best interests of the US government. Everybody swears to the same oath, regardless of branch of service. Its just one of the conditions volunteers accept when they sign up. No trick, deceit or immorality whatsoever.

Well, its always been the needs of the Service before the needs of the individual.

Soldiers drafted for one year in 1940, expecting to be discharged in december 1941 rudely found that out.

Most served until 1945/46

Compared to today, who had more reason to whine?

I have a family member who was supposed to go home Dec.15th, 1941, he finally got home Nov. 27th, 1945

He had to go to North Africa, Sicily, Normandy, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany first.

He never bit-ched about it, it was understood that sacrifices had to be made, something thats lacking today

I do not totally agrees with it, but when you have a voluntarily force and not enough personnel coming in then you have to do something. Its better then starting a draft. At least the people that are in not wanted to be in.

You need to read the second page of the enlistment contract. Anyone who reads it before enlisting understands stop-loss. It's right there in black in white.

Read it for yourself.

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/pdf/enlistment...

Now, do you understand? If there's something you don't understand about it then just email me, I'll explain it to you in detail.