Regarding enlistments in the armed forces:

[1monster]

When one enlists in the armed forces, the government and the enlistee are entering into a binding contract, are they not? Is that contract not for a specific time only with only a few means to end that contract before its end date?

Let's say that one signs up for a six year gig. Four of those years on active duty and two on reserve. This person serves his four years active duty and a year and a half of his reserves when his unit is called up to go to Iraq. He has been over in Iraq now for nearly a year, and his contracted time in the service is over. But the government announces that no service person will be granted discharge for an unspecified time.

How can the government do this? Once the contract is over, how is the government legally able to extend the contract against the wishes of the enlisted?

[RobertSeattle]

1. Might want to read DD-4 in its entirety

(I doubt must 18 years olds do!)

http://www.dior.whs.mil/forms/DD0004.PDF

[1monster]

2. Ugh!

I guess section nine, b5c answers that. They hold ALL the cards, don't they? :eyes:

Thanks for the info.

[sirshack]

3. Are you sure you have it right?

I don't know if you can split up an enlistment (i.e. 4 years active/2 years reserve). You can probably re-enlist as a reservist/active once your gig is up, but I'm not sure. I've never heard of such a thing, but then again, I'm a civilian.

[alfredo]

4. after my 4 year

enlistment, I went in the inactive reserves. I had a critical MOS, so I was supposed to stay in touch with the army.

[cap]

5. read the fine print...

the government always reserves the right to extend service unilaterally...