U.S. Army Exceeding Re-enlistment and First-Time Enlistment Goals

Bingo, and this is the important part of the point.

Enlistment is different than Re-enlistment.

Now one could argue that a decrease in recruiting but a increase in reenlistment is precisely telling of the state of afairs in Iraq. Draw your own conclusions, but if infact the re-enlistment goals have not been artificially deflated (beyond a drop which would be due to an actual decrease in nessessity for the military) there is only one real conclusion I would see to draw.

Also, regarding the USA and USMC not making goals. The USN, USCG, and USAF ENLISTMENTS have almost always made goals, as well as all five branches COMMISSIONS. It's only the ENLISTMENT of two of five branches that falls short.

So we're talking about ground force, junior enlisted soldiers that we're not getting to join the military, however those who are already in are staying.

So I would propose, that perhaps, the at-home general perception (at least those of military age) would be unrealistically worse than the front-line perception. Seeing that the point of reenlistment and the point of enlistment are fairly similar in regards to service in Iraq. If you look at the lists, it's not all PFC, CPR, PVT who're getting killed in Iraq, it's Sergeants, Lieutenants, Majors, Senior and Junior enlisted as well as commissioned officers alike.

The Gunslinger