Captain Brad Schwan responds regarding his lawsuit to leave the service

I recently wrote about Army Captain Brad Schwan, who has sued to get out of the Army Reserve.

Well, he wrote me an e-mail:

I am the CPT in question. I want to make clear one point. Contrary to Trevor’s suggestion in the post, officers are being held to an equal standard as enlisted men. He mentions that enlisted men mobilized overseas are being stop-lossed. So are the officers. I was stop-lossed in 2002 and was forced to serve an extra year which I did without complaint.

This is very different from my current situation. I am not stop-lossed and I have completed my MSO almost a year ago. And this is where enlisted men have a better situation than officers. If you are NOT stop-lossed, as an enlisted man, when your MSO comes up, you are automatically outprocessed unless you reenlist. There is no process by which a buruaucrat without a legally authorized stop-loss can hold you longer. As an officer, you must resign and hope it is approved, even if your MSO has expired. And in my case, and many other officers, LTG Helmly, acting of his own accord, denied our resignations in violation of the law. So I strongly dispute the notion that officers are getting a better deal. That is clearly wrong and shows a lack of understanding of the difference between stop-loss and nonobligated resignations, MSOs, etc.

I agree that officers should be held at the very least to the same standard if not a higer one than the soldiers they lead. But before you accuse one of not doing so, make yourself aware of all of the facts. Stop-loss is legal and applies to officers and enlisted men equally. It is imposed legally by statute and authorized by a politcal branch of the government. In my case, I am NOT stop-lossed and an unelected general with a conflict of interest is illegally disapproving my resignation without political approval and in violation of the statutes.

I don’t pretend to have it the worst of anyone out there. But I don’t think the fact that some people have been legally stop-lossed grants the authority to a general to violate the laws of Congress. If you believe that, so be it.

Before casting stones, please learn all of the facts. Please visit my website at http://militaryinjustice.homestead.com or feel free to e-mail me. I welcome your questions or comments. Thanks for your service Trevor. I hope the government honors its commitment to you when you choose to leave the service.

I hope so too, Capt. Schwanz. The federal government and the military both have a long and inglorious history of making promises and breaking them.

Your web site has depth, and it’s obvious you are attempting to be patient and proceed within the Rule of Law, which I respect. After having read through your site, captain, I’m convinced that you have a case. Although I found it particularly hard to read sideways, the government’s reply brief with exhibits did seem somewhat ridiculous.

To be quite frank, I have doubts about re-enlisting myself. I won’t discuss them in this post, because it’s about Capt. Schwanz and his case. But I will say that you can only stretch someone so far before they break. Every individual has a different breaking point. When he or she reaches it, they will simply not re-enlist anymore.

Of the people in my unit here in Baghdad, 25% had to be called up from Inactive Ready Reserve status to fill empty slots. The Army simply cannot continue playing bureaucratic games with people’s lives and expect to maintain adequate staffing levels.

Putting yourself in harm’s way is one thing. Putting yourself in harm’s way indefinitely after your voluntary contract has expired is quite another. I don’t know how long the bureaucrats in D.C. think they can play paperwork games to make everything look hunky dory when it isn’t, but I’m sure they will. Stop-loss cannot be used in perpetuity and the military brass better start coming up with some better ways to retain their best talent.

Decide for yourself though. Visit the good captain’s site. Read a plain English newspaper article. And ask yourself if you think Captain Schwanz might just be getting a raw deal from the Army.

Recruiting and keeping the right people to keep the American military strong and healthy is a very delicate task. When the government makes a contract with an individual it needs to honor that contract. Not doing so is a recipe for disaster in the long term.