U.S. Army vs Family; You Lose.

Hey, everybody.

An A.P. story from Davidson, NC tells of a woman, honorably discharged from the Army who is being called back to active duty. She is in the I.R.R. (Inactive Ready Reserve) so she still has time left on her contract with the service. You don't get paid in the I.R.R.; it's more of a way to keep track of you in case the Army needs you.

Now this isn't unusual.
All soldiers know their time commitment when they enlist. And all soldiers know that, even after discharge, they may be recalled to active duty while they are in I.R.R.

The problem: she has children and if deployed, there is no one to care for them. Her husband is required to travel and she has no family that is capable of taking the children. She has appealed to the Army for a release but has been denied and is being required to report.

I was in the Army. I signed on for a 6 year commitment, served 3 active and 3 inactive. I'm proud of my service and understand the obligation required and the sacrifices involved.

But this makes no sense to me.
I know the Army has service requirements. Manpower needs and such.
But how does this serve the good of the Nation? How does breaking up a family help the community, the people, the state, or the Federal Government?
How does this promote or advance National security?

I'm sure there are those who say, a commitment is a commitment. When I was in I used to hear,"if the Army wanted you to have a family, they would have issued you one".

But times have changed.
More and more soldiers are married. Sometimes family is what makes military life bearable.

The military is a tough job.

Don't make it harder.