According to her entry, GI Jane first enlisted in 1987, which means that she has “re-enlisted” at least twice (probably more) since then (assuming continous active Army enlisted service…).

Her first “hitch” probably obligated her for four years, then she could “take six” as a maximum each time she “re-enlisted” after that.

She had to take positive action to affirmitively intiate such re-enlistments, to include re-taking the oath. Even senior NCO’s over 20 years who are trying to serve to 30 still have to formally “re-enlist”.

She doesn’t spell out any specifics about exactly why the soldiers she heard grousing really want to “go back and kick their recruiter’s ass”. So I would take these comments as sardonic humor along the lines of normal soldier grousing, rather than as a indicator that the Army is about to fall apart.

It’s my understanding that re-enlistment rates for Army units serving in Iraq are higher than usual. It’s the “initial entry” rates (the bringing in first- time soldiers) that have fallen off some, probably a reflection of the way the mainstream media constantly emphasizes the negative aspects of the war in Iraq.

Her complaint about the lack of teamwork (too many “new soldiers” constantly moving into more senior positions) has been true for almost all armies since the beginning of time. We don’t have career private soldiers and junior NCO’s in the US Army (nor career lieutenants and captains); the personnel assignment philosophy is known as “up or out”, which means that senior NCO’s like her have to think of themselves as “teachers” who are constantly in this mode.

When viewed in this light, complaining about too rapid “turnover” in the Army is as pointless as a grade school teacher complaining about having to start all over with a new class of students.

Fixed.

Thank you for the headsup.