Historic Name United States Air Force Academy Cadet Area Other: Fill & Download for Free

Two leaders around same age in military uniforms… (20–25)This is an update from 2021, January.Now looking back at this article(text more so) is almost an Kemalist propaganda, ofcourse ı still like our protagonist but now, as a more mature man ı would suggest that anyone who is interested in him should definitly NOT see this text as a major or accurate reference.—————————————————————————————————-I will try as much as ı can to be fair and not write something that is lie or exra-exaggerated. To be honest ı do not know about Churchill as Atatürk. Sure, i made some research and reading, but not as much as Atatürk, so pardon me.(but more than any other simple folk ı dare say) But ı am no history professor, and this article is not gonna be published in some high level historical magazine next to Bernard Lewis or Fernand Braudel etc…What ı am gonna write can sound like propaganda(lot of people said to me that in comments etc), but ı do not get it why they say that. I am not lying or makings these thing up in my mind. I am simply writing (maybe my way of interpreta-tion) the facts and how it went down. I do not think it does not make that much of a great difference. Because as long as ı stick to the facts, how far can ı go and make a fictional history? İn this article ı will compare two great leaders interms of tactical, efficiency, forward-thinking, charisma, social life, political attitude, power, courage, sacrifice, will, career, intellectual, talent, backgorund etc.So here we go!Ataturk, the revered father of modern Turkey, was the most intelligent benevolent dictator and a legendary military leader, who, despite enormous difficulties, accomplished unbelievable tasks in an incredibly short period of time (15 years)He was the only undefeated Ottoman commander in WW1, who devastated the Allies in Gallipoli,(And what a luck,it was Churchill’s idea and he lost) freed Istanbul from the invading British forces, cleaned Anatolia from the invading Greeks and won the Turkish War of Liberation. He, the first leader to attack and defeat Islamic theocracy, was a dictator, who planted the seeds of democracy, who freed the women, transformed a rotten empire into an independent republic, gave back to his nation its sovereignty, introduced his nation to science and reason and fine arts.He was a military Genius, Bold Revolutioner, A Great Statesmen, Champion of The East, Men of Science and much more. He was THE most progressive and visioner leader that world ever saw.He almost lost his left eye in Trablusgarp(Tripoli) while fighting against Italians.(1912)He was with his soldiers in trenches at Gallipoli, where a little shrapnel destroyed a watch which was in his chest pocket and shredded it into pieces.(1915)He managed to defeat Russians in Caucasus and Eastern Anatolia Front and recapture 2 Ottoman citys named Muş and Bitlis, which was Ottoman Army’s only proper victory in that Front(1916) until Russian Empire fall apart from inside thanks to Bolshevik Revolution and as a result they pull back their Army in that Region. (1918)Then fought in Arabian deserts and managed to stop the British forces near Aleppo, Syria. While bloody Germans pick up their things and went back to Germany and Enver Pasha send him there, although he knew there were no bloody ‘Army’ left in that Front that can be called or described as an ‘Ottoman Force.’(1918)An than he went back to İstanbul and after that started the ‘War of İndependence’ which took place between 1919–1923.Which he devilishly separate the the Allies and and deal with them one by one. He, with utmost perfection applied ‘split and destroy’ policy during National Struggle years.Following years, he spend his all energy and everything he got to make The New Turkey as an peaceful, secular, democratic, scientific, independent, sovereign, wealthy, industrialist nation…(You can see his left eye on this picture and in others, is little bit squint. Thanks to his injury which he took in Libya.)Now, let’s look at Churchill.Churchill saved England and has played considerable role when it comes to ‘Liberating Europe’. Lot of people gonna say “Noo! He defeated Axis forces and Nazis all by himself and save the World!.” But i think, this statement is bit too much. But we all know it was Russians and Americans, Brits did not participate as much as any of these armys, and it terms of naval force, not so much as American’s. British military loses in WW1 were even higher than WW2.But also he help Yankees to engage in a war and prepared an alliance and managed to keep the Nazis out of his mainland thanks to his insidious intelligence and British Naval and Air Forces. He also smartly maneuver his way through victory, and support-assist Charles de Gaulle’s vision of liberating France and some other political agendas…He was not a revulotioner, visioner or reformer, did not face civil war or revolts, (in his country)neither shortage of provisions(not as musch as Turk or Russian states let’s say) nor encounter political clash like Mustapha Kemal Atatürk. (Kemal had to fight agains his own Sultan and Ottoman goverment at the same time.) Sir Winston did not transformed a rotten Empire into secular Republic, he did not face great obstacles, he had the power of greatest imperialist military-naval and industrial force on earth and after some point mighty USA industry and army-navy in his aid.His father was a Lord. Also until World War 2 he was not a succesful officer or potician either. He has lost the Gallipoli, and once captured in Anglo-Boer war. Of course that does not necessarily reduce his skills. He was a racist and dedicated imperialist and somewhat responsible for at least few? innocent İndian, Afgan and African deaths. In the West, Churchill is a freedom fighter, the man who grimly withstood Nazism and helped save western democracy. It's a civilizational legacy that has been polished and placed on a mantle for decades. But there's another side to Churchill's politics and career that should not be forgotten amid the endless parade of eulogies. To many outside the West, he remains a grotesque racist and a stubborn imperialist, forever on the wrong side of history. "I hate Indians," he once trumpeted. "They are a beastly people with a beastly religion."He referred to Palestinians as "barbaric hordes who ate little but camel dung." When quashing insurgents in Sudan in the earlier days of his imperial career, Churchill boasted of killing three "savages." Contemplating restive populations in northwest Asia, he infamously lamented the "squeamishness" of his colleagues, who were not in "favor of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes." He ordered the bombing of Dresden, set the troops onto the miners of South Wales, and opposed Gandhi's non violent campaign for independence.He also was a very(in terms of literature) intellectual man and write dozens of books and win the Nobel price. But i think that was something more of a potitical issue, not trully literary. Just like today. (Exept science awards, rest of the Nobel award are little bit out of equitability)-Atatürk was also nominated for Nobel peace prize in 1938 by his former enemy(Greek priminister) but ı do not think it is really important.And ı wanna make one impartant point too, when Kemal achieved all of his major goals and accomplishments he was between 30–45 and obviously, and he did not have as much as experience in politics or about how to make a revolution in general.Churchill was about 65 years old allready when he was priminister. And only after that he was ragarded as a historical figure. I am not saying he did not achieve anything until he was 65 years old ofcourse, what ı am saying is, he had a lot of time and experience(and fails to think it over) in his life and did not encounter with any truly challenging incidents until that point. And if it was not for WW2, he was propaply gonna be some casual politician and a retired naval officer. (Well, same goes for Kemal actually, if it was not for WW1 he was not gonna be famous.)Kemal was young, much poor, propaply less educated(i mean he was not well raised or rich or had library in his mansion or lived in well sophisticated environment such as England with the best universitys the world) and inexperienced and much more alone (his general did not support his reforms or entirely agreed on his campaigns and even make things hard for him at his every attempt and he had to fight agains his own goverment, had to convince his long suffering nation for one last war and upcoming reforms) in his triumph.Churchill never actually fight or charge into a trench with his revolver or take a hit. Kemal was much more brave as a soldier. (Of course Churchill was Naval officer but still…)Kemal find and create a 2 new military strategy and successfully performed them during Sakarya war and later on in Great Offense. They are his own gift to the ‘Art of War’.During Sakarya he performed a military tactic that sets forth and is the basis of modern defense strategies. Refusing to defend in a line on the name of the regional defensive warfare. This stategy is the essence of the asymmetrical war. By his statement: "There is no line defence, there is only zone defense. this zone is the whole homeland. Unless every single piece of the homeland is flooded with its citizen's blood, it cannot be abandoned to the enemy. Therefore, either small or big, every unit can be driven from its position. However, either small or big, every unit starts fighting again with the enemy at the first location it could stop. Any unit should not withdraw even if the friendly units are doing so. They have to insist and resist at their position until their end." This was improved and applied in a bigger scale with more mobilized unis by Marshall Zhukov in battles of Kursk and Stalingrand. Mustafa Kemal was a cadet in one of the best military academies of the world. Even though this type of warfare was not taught to him.(Nor to any other other european continental military officers.) Later on he eliminated the very logic of the front war by virtue of his military genius. İn a front battle, a broken line is a disaster and and according to this military doctrine when that happens, whole front should retreat in proportion to it's length until the gab is seized before the enemy circles your units. The troops of Kemâl however did not do so. During Sakarya war which took 22 day and night, (it was the longest military pitched battle in history) every time when the line was broken, a fragment(units) of the very broken line was ordered to retreated slightly, gather their strength and then counterattack as quick as possible, as a results the Greeks broke the Turkish lines dozens of times but never managed to force them to retreat properly. Greek commanders waited for days for their dispatch riders to bring the news of withdrawing Turkish armys, but they never get that. Because in their mind, which was filled with current military doctrine(just like rest of the world and including Tukısh commanders) they thought that Turks 'must' retreat back to Ankara which means almost another 100 km to the east... But Turks never retreated except for about 100-500 meters and constatly keep coming back. Greeks captured almost all the hills, roads and villages but never managed to force the Turkısh army to disperse. This tactic is was a slap in the Prussian Army and Clausewitz doctrines that were dominating in Europe until that time, because it's success, it cause reinterpretation of current front battle tactics.His unnamed ‘Blitzkrieg’ tactic in Great Offense: Battles of the World War I were locked on trenches. The concept of war needed some improvements for tactics and technologies. The Germans accomplished this with Blitzkrieg. But approximately twenty years ago from the German, the Turks had already passed the trenches at the Great Offensive during the National Struggle. This was the evolution of Turkish strategic attack thought and had been shown in the operation plans of Sarıkamış and the Great Offensive. The Sarıkamış operation plan was successful without victory whereas the Great Offensive was victorious. By assessing the strategic end with success of the assault in West Anatolia and its similarities with the Blitzkrieg, it can be said that the Great Offensive had created the basis of the Blitzkrieg. The difference between the Blitzkrieg and the Great Offensive is that tanks, aircrafts and paratroopers which were gained in battlefields by technologic developments, can be used vast fields and compose more then one centre of gravity. In the essence of both is that a movable military unit, which can circuit behind the enemy lines, destroy the enemy initially by creating the second virtual front in the enemy lines between the front and back line and then by cutting the supply and run way of main forces of enemy. The Blitzkrieg tactic is to prevent the enemy from setting up a regular defense by swift, sudden and maneuvering attacks. Atatürk carefully studied the strategy which he saw it from British forces (but they never managed to make a tangible doctrine out of it) that was applied againts the Ottoman forces in Syria and improve and used this in the Great Offensive which constitutes the most important part of the War of Independence. The Blitzkrieg attack of Ataturk in Great Offense was transformed by him. But his Blitzkrief had few differences due tohis current logistic and technology dissimilaritys. Such as:a)Blitzkrieg tactics and sudden maneuvering attacks are carried out by firearms such as tanks and vehicles with machine guns. But Atatürk sudden and maneuver attacks with cavalry forces. For this reason, the Great Offence was the last pitched battle won by the cavalry.b)The main goal in Blitzkrieg tactics is to destroy the enemy with a quick attack without letting them build a defence. But when Atatürk used the Blitzkrieg against the Greek Army in Great Offense, his main aim was NOT(he did not have enough men) to swallow the Greek Army, instead forcing them to retreat all the way back to İzmir and then slowly and piece by piece eat them alive while they are trying to escape. For this reason, Atatürk leave enemy's northern flank open in order to let the Greek Army escape from that direction instead of encircle them entirely. And indeed he was successful. In the 330 square kilometers area, Atatürk managed to disperse 200,000 of Greek soldiers and melted them slowly...About 20 years later Germans improved this tactic and you know what hapenned until it has become unsustainable after some point. Just like Kemal’s foresight, it required continuous breakthrough, when the element of surpise was lost and generate too much length for replenishment and also with the absence of (also in this case absence of weapon or any military industry because he had no factory for producing gun or aminition, istead few thousand well skilled workers who managed to make all the war provisions as a result of their handiwork) practicable geography this doctrine was becoming inefficient.İnterms of Turkish military history he had 3 more achievements. Turkish army always had few weaknesses such as waging war at night, fighting in snowy(in winter) geography, and retreating.(last one usually causes confision and absolute dissolution for Ottoman army.)He was the only Ottoman commander that managed to conduct a proper military retreat (without complete dissolution) to Sakarya river(about 100 km) after wars of Kütahya-Eskişehir were lost to the Greeks.He defeated the Russians in winter which was something unaccomplished by the Turkısh army over almost 250 years of constant war with the Russians. Enver Pasha tried to that in Sarıkamış 1 years before Mustapha Kemal, but it turned up to be a disaster. Enver was even warned by his teacher that it was an impossible idea to obtain since the war on snow(in winter) was Russian Army’s speciality.He stopped the everlasting western retreat: The second Vienna defeat is regarded as the beginning of the decline of the Ottoman Empire against the West in the European geography. Beginning with the defeat of Vienna in 1683, the defensive period was over and after 238 years of constant retreat(eastern Europe) began. Later on, it has come to an end with victorious battle that lasted 22 days and night on the Sakarya front, in the Minor Asia in September 1921, with this battle the very first time Turks were able re-attacking and managed to gain some of thier land back again.As long as ı know and read and research W.Chuchill has no tactical or strategic innovation in ‘Art of War’.Two leader around the same age.(40–45)Atatürk born as a simple poor Ottoman peasant and climb his bloody way up to the being a almost God. He had nothing and he came from nothing. Her mother wanted to make him an imam and achieve a religious education or work in the fields just like any common peasant boy. İnstead he, with his own mind choose the army and secretly enter an exam for the military and passed it.Later on participate minor succesfull roles in Syria, Trablusgarp, 2.Balkan War and major roles in Gallipoli, Eastern Anatolian and Southern Campaigns of the Great War. Achieved first proper victory agains İmperialist and led the War of İndependence. He was always successful and famous soldier starting from day one.Therewithal, perform a victorious revulotion. Which he, very first time in Muslim history, managed to build a Secular state. Create an compulsory, secular and free education, gave equal rights to womens etc.He was not a racist, of course as a Turkısh nationalist i do not think he was fond of Arabs or Ermanians or other İmperialists either. Nor he was an imperialist, ı mean he was an Ottoman officer, which was an Empire, which makes him İmperialist ultimately, but bare with me. I meant he did not partake in mass murder or conduct duties agains basic military dignity. For example he was fighting in Gallipoli during Armenian deportation in 1915 and he also was not responsible for mass relocation of Greeks after the war besause it was an official request from the very same Greek goverment that he just beated. And above all he was, in his mind and heart was not a imperialist. Even as an young officer, he suggest the dissociation of Ottoman lands from other non-Turkısh lands such as Arabia, southern parts of Mesopotamia which does not even contain little bit Turkısh minority. (Exept government officials) And some other parts of Balkanian territories that does not include ostensible Turkısh populace. But ı do not think he does not mean to discard every city or land that has less Turkısh population that other non-Turkısh ones. Because in that case Selanik, İzmir and even İstanbul should change hands. (Becasuse in those citys Turkısh-muslim populace is just about half or much less than others or barely significant) But i think he means in general. Because he thinks that non-Turkısh müslim people are almost totally burden, disloyal to Chaliph and Sultan and he also thinks that eventually they will want and gain their freedoom just like their western Ottoman subjecst. He also has same ideas on non-müslim folks too, since they are trying to gain their freedom for the last century and revolting-fighting constatly agains Ottoman rule. And deep down he had NO sympathy for the Monarchs or the Caliphate. Specially after gaining power he never try to encourage any military operation or seek to obtain any pre-Ottoman region agains any of it’s neighbors. But he was not some affective and docile statesmen either.(For example, annexation of Hatay)I am not saying Churhill was a small or unimportant guy, ı am just saying he was much more well raised, he had more opportunities. Whole İmperial Force of Brtain was with him, his nation was with him to the end. And he had enormous allys.At the other hand, Sultan and Goverment of İstanbul at some point put a death penalty on Kemal’s head and send little troops called Kuvayi İnzibatiye(Caliphate Army), at some point he resigned from the Army which he served for almost 20 years as a undefeated soldier. He had nothing exept his reputation, he had little men around him. He was broke and even had to buy a suit with some borrowed money. (Since he never wear any civil clothes as an Ottoman soldier and just had one or two uniforms) At some point even his people were against him and think he was a Kafir(irreligious) and rebel. Piece by piece he gather up the all militia groups and remaining forces of Ottoman Army and try to build a regular Army. (And get some economic support from İndians and USSR) He managed to organize a separate assembly in godforsaken Bozkır(Steps) in Middle Anatolia, which is a little town called Ankara. Then he managed to repel the bloody enemies that surrounded his country, after that the Sultan and the Caliph.Once he was able to reconquer the territory an even more important task needed to be taken care of: transform the country from its perception of being a Muslim part of the Empire into a modern, secular, democratic, nation State.For that he abolished the Caliphate, changed the alphabet from arabic to latin, gave equal rights to all citizens and voting rights to women (prior to France and many other countries), established a Civil code, an university, prom, opera, fine arts schools, dozens of factorys, few Turkish Banks, and most importantly he was intent to make Turkey an independent country culturally, militarily, economically, financially, juridically.But also, on can say Atatürk was a better leader all told but his decisions weren't as important as Churchill's in determining the course of world history.Possibly the most notable thing about him is that despite numerous attempts to replicate his achievements by various leaders throughout the Islamic world, not one was able to do what he did despite not one having to face as much adversity as he did. There have been very few leaders in the world of Atatürk’s calibre.İ some cases further and in some incidents he was less succesfull, in some way he was equal to Napolyon, Great Petro, Fatih Sultan Mehmet, Emir Timur, Abraham Lincoln, Ceaser, Great Alexander, Washington…I mean he did not create an new vast Empire like Chengiz or Timur or Napolyon or Great Alexanders. Or partake in new conquest and expand like he Ceasear or Petro. Yes, in general he did not affect europe or world history like other great people. But he was very important for Turks, Balkans, subdued folks and nations of Asia and Middle-east and specially for Müslim world.Also…Cenghiz’s, Timur’s States were short lived and had no sustainability and just like they rise, they fall and bring more of a chaos and disorder.Alexanders was also Macedonian, and tried to mixed east and westerns cultures and create an binary world for his Empire. But he was short lived and this concept was not understood by his generals or his people. And above all those two cultures were opposite of each other and this did not go well in some aspects. Atatürk however, like Alexander, tried to achieve cultural transformation but unlike Alexander he realize mixing two seperate and counter cultures together was an absurd, at some point will be useless to acquire. Seeing and experiencing mixed and chaotic rule of Ottomans, also trying to adopt the western way of life, industry, art form but at the same time being stubborn about keeping almost all kinds of eastern values and causing two headed administration in about every aspect of Ottoman rule. Such as economy, jurisdiction, clothing, education etc. So he decicated to erase the eastern culture and as musch as he can as a result of seeing two constatly fighting concept will never form a unified way of anything what so ever. (You can not be jihadist, bigoted, tyrann and also be democrat, liberal, secular at the some time.) Maybe on the way of gaining power to enforce these things,(ı am talking about western values)but not as a result. (Like Great Petro)Great Petro westernized the army, administarion, encourage fine arts, take away ther power of Orthodoks Church. Change the calender, change the clothing etc, and eventually cleared the way for upcoming rising of Russian state. Atatürk was like him in many ways too… Petro was succesfull and his state was sustainable and solid, thus the Russia was liberated from it’s Asian origins.(İn some cases at least.)Napolyon become a Emperor and throw every idea that France revolution stood for and become revolutioner dictator and start launching endless campaigns for his exaggerated ideas and finally after a quick rise, a much more quick demise pursuited him. He has gone too far and lose his Empire to General Ktuzov and Marshall Winter. Of course he was a military genius and perform lot of reforms and encourage industry, science and fine arts and create and launch the very way of French culture and literacy and make French language a universal one and above all Lingua franca. Napolyon didn’t spread the streams of nationalism and liberty conscioulsy but his timing was very important, After Napolyon neither returning to monarchy nor spreading of republics was possible. There was a European harmony for a while but later chaos began again. And he died alone in St Helena.Ceaser expanded the Roman Empire and make lot of reforms in terms of administration and economy, jurisdiction, he was also a very intellectual man, but at the and he was also become a life-long dictator and put an end to Roman Republic just to satisfy his ambitions. As you all know he was back stabbed and die without seeing the fruit of his rise. Some of his reforms were immediately reversed. He was also impressed by Alexander and tried to follow his steps but gone too far and even realize the very opposition under his nose.(or take it seriously) He was a son of very nobel family that was even said linked with Greek gods. The Julian family believed to be descended from Aeneas, the prince of Troy, and believed that his mother was Venus. He was well raised and did not really face poverty, he did not face any enemy equal to his well organized Roman legiones and fight agains kingdoms and barbaric tribes. He was a commander of a rising state, not the falling one…Fatih was also interesting, he encoureage fine arts and science and like Timur, Alexander, Napolyon where ever he conquered he gathered up scholars, writers, scientists and send them to İstanbul and show them deep respect. He perform reforms in many areas, amy, administration, art etc. He wanted to conquere Rome and unity and revive the Roman Empire but alas… After his death, his son did not even understood his reforms and reversed some of them. And shortly after Ottoman expand was languished and until today he remains to be greatest Sultan of the Ottoman dynasty and one of the greatest Türks ever. But he was also son of a Sultan and had a very good education and he was left with a well armed and organized state with no life threatening neighboors. He was a commander of a rising state, not the falling one…I am not gonna even talk about Hitler,Mussolini,Lenin, Stalin or Cheguevera…Now, back to our actuall comparison…There you go, two good looking gentlemen…(And also seeeing and looking and listening dozen of footage, photograph, records, ı can say that Kemal was more charismatic, handsome, well dressed and impressive, thus comes his flirting skills with women. But except in a personal level that does not really something of a game changing aspect.)Britain was not even properly invaded for fuck sake! Turkey was invaded from North-East by Armenians, West from Greeks, South from France,and it’s Capital by Allied Forces. And many harbour and middle Anatolian cities were also invaded by Allies.(Like Antalya,Samsun,Konya,Bursa,Hatay)İn his military life he fought against Brits, Frenchs, Russians, İtaliens, chase the damn committees in Makedonia, deal with the Armenian and Arabian rebels and traitors and much more…And above all he did all of the thing i wrote at the beginning of my article.The most impressive part is how solid Ataturk’s state was. In the last century, almost every state changed it’s form completely falling to some sort of revolution or war, especially amongst states that were newly formed in the wake of the World Wars, yet Ataturk’s Turkish state remains with us today.Atatürk was just in my view THE MOST efficient man among them.No fucking delusions, no extrem ideas(except making a secular, modern nation out of medieval-islamic state and confronting against Empires of Britain, France, Russia and few more nations.), no imaginary campaigns, no romanticism, he was rock solid. Never fought more than he has to, never gone too far and start becoming just a common Tyrant, no ideologicial obsession (he had general point of destination and a clear frame but no dogma), never ask or fight for thing he can not achieve in his life time. He did not gain some lands or invade anywhere just lo lose it like Napolion. He did not tried to create a mixed culture like Alexander. Did not die in a fight, or on some deserted island or stabbed or let his country into some chaos like Hitler, Mussolini. He did not go down the road of Communism or Fascism or chase the phantom ideal of Turan. He was nationalist but no rasist. He create a social goverment and get some support from USSR in early years of Republic, but he was never a socialist. He was fond of democracy and parliamentarism(due to his education and world view) but not a soft hearted naive liberal either. Propaply an atheist, but never interfere with his people’s way of worshiping as long as they do not interfere with his reforms and remain individual or supressed religion and started destroying holly places like Communists. He was a great soldier,(both strategic and tactical) but never seek war unless it is inevitable. Basically never do or want something that he could not achieve and see though the end of it.İn a job that had to be done, no one did as well as Atatürk!İf Churchill was in his shoes with the same historical and compelling circumstances and same amount of small(or shortage of) resources and beggarly opportunities that Kemal was surrounded or encountered back in 1910s and 1920s, WC would propaply lose. But what if MKA was in his shoes later in 1940? Well it is up to you…And even with all that being said, look at the things he had accomplished. Anyone studying his life can see clearly how extraordinary he was. He was a man of firm principles and incorruptible moral fibre with godlike will power in an era of stubborn İmperialists, bullies and national-chauvinist brutes and shameless warmongers.The Turks almost worship him, the question should not be why do Turks worship Ataturk, but how is this remarkable man not more well known throughout the world.Personally i like them both, but we are living in English speaking, Anglo-Sakson world, and history basicly is much more written by western point of view, so they can easily create or polish an image and sell it trough out the world by movies, films and documentarys. (because visual arts is something of a western mind.) I think Churchill is overrated because he is a figure of current hegemonic Western world. (British, Anglo-Sakson, Western, European, Modern, Civil, Industrial, English speaking culture-nation.) And Atatürk is underrated becasue he is a figure (comes from even thou he was going to change that eventually) of an old, collapsed, dispersed and excluded era and culture.(Medieval, Religious, Türkish, Müslim, Authoritarian, Agricultural etc.)I am not some liberal soft-hearted who tries to find an absurd comparison or ground argument like ‘White Supremacy’ or ‘Male-dominated society’ but still i think what ı say is considerable.“More than anything, he is a founder, the greatest nation-builder of modern times.” Andrew Mango“Centuries are rarely raise as a genius. Look at our unfortunate situation that the 20th century's genius has been granted to Turks and fate has made him our antagonist.” David Llyod George“Mustapha Kemal Atatürk was undoubtedly one of the greatest statesmen who grew up before the World War in the 20th century, a courageous and great revolutionary who had not been granted any other nation.” David Ben Gurion,Prime Minister of Israel, 1963“He is a great man, not only for Turkey, but a great leader for all eastern nations.” Emanullah Khan, King of Afghanistan"I have already made private and official speeches with up to 15 rulers and presidents. I do not remember being crushed like this until this very night. Gazi Mustafa Kemal Pasha has an incredible willpower." British General Sir Charles Townshand“My sadness is that there is no longer a possibility for the violent desire to meet this man. When i was discussing with Litvinov, the Foreign Minister of Soviet Russia, I asked him, in his opinion, who was the most precious and most remarkable state man in all of Europe. He told me that the President of Turkey Mustafa Kemal was Europe's most valuable statesman .” Franklin Roosevelt“Atatürk is: An outstanding person who devoted himself for the development of international understanding cooperation and peace a revolutionist who realized extraordinary reforms the first Leader who fought against imperialism and colonialism. A unique Statesman respectful to human rights pioneer of worldwide peace who never discriminated people according to their color religion or race through out his life founder of Turkish Republic.” UNESCO’s definition of him. (United Nations Educational Scientific and Culture Organizations)Last but not least:In 2002, when Arnold Ludwig, a professor of psychiatry, released his book, King of the Mountain (an 18 year long study), examining the nature of political leadership, he compared and ranked all known national leaders of the 20th century. And guest was the winner? İt is the only book that managed to create tangible-scientific score table when it comes to ranking leaders.(At least ı ever encounter) So read that…Now some quotations:“It is, thank heaven, difficult if not impossible for the modern European to fully appreciate the force which fanaticism exercises among an ignorant, warlike and Oriental population. Several generations have elapsed since the nations of the West have drawn the sword in religious controversy, and the evil memories of the gloomy past have soon faded in the strong, clear light of Rationalism and human sympathy. Indeed it is evident that Christianity, however degraded and distorted by cruelty and intolerance, must always exert a modifying influence on men's passions, and protect them from the more violent forms of fanatical fever, as we are protected from smallpox by vaccination. But the Mahommedan religion increases, instead of lessening, the fury of intolerance. It was originally propagated by the sword, and ever since, its votaries have been subject, above the people of all other creeds, to this form of madness. In a moment the fruits of patient toil, the prospects of material prosperity, the fear of death itself, are flung aside. The more emotional Pathans are powerless to resist. All rational considerations are forgotten. Seizing their weapons, they become Ghazis—as dangerous and as sensible as mad dogs: fit only to be treated as such. While the more generous spirits among the tribesmen become convulsed in an ecstasy of religious bloodthirstiness, poorer and more material souls derive additional impulses from the influence of others, the hopes of plunder and the joy of fighting. Thus whole nations are roused to arms. Thus the Turks repel their enemies, the Arabs of the Soudan break the British squares, and the rising on the Indian frontier spreads far and wide. In each case civilisation is confronted with militant Mahommedanism. The forces of progress clash with those of reaction. The religion of blood and war is face to face with that of peace. Luckily the religion of peace is usually the better armed.” WCThe Story of the Malakand Field Force: An Episode of Frontier War (1898), Chapter III.“I pass with relief from the tossing sea of Cause and Theory to the firm ground of Result and Fact.” WCThe Story of the Malakand Field Force: An Episode of Frontier War (1898), Chapter III.————————————Winston Churchill———————————————-“I do not leave any verses, dogmas, nor any moulded standard principles as moral heritage. My moral heritage is science and reason. What I have done and intended to do for the Turkish nation lies in that. Anyone willing to appropriate my ideas for themselves after me will be my moral inheritors provided they would approve the guidance of science and reason on this axis.” MKAAs quoted in Kemalist Devrim ve İdeolojisi (1980) by İsmet Giritli, İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, p. 13“For nearly five hundred years, these rules and theories of an Arab Shaikh and the interpretations of generations of lazy and good-for-nothing priests have decided the civil and criminal law of Turkey. They have decided the form of the Constitution, the details of the lives of each Turk, his food, his hours of rising and sleeping the shape of his clothes, the routine of the midwife who produced his children, what he learned in his schools, his customs, his thoughts-even his most intimate habits. Islam – this theology of an immoral Arab – is a dead thing. Possibly it might have suited tribes in the desert. It is no good for modern, progressive state. God’s revelation! There is no God! These are only the chains by which the priests and bad rulers bound the people down. A ruler who needs religion is a weakling. No weaklings should rule.” MKAAs quoted in Grey Wolf: Mustafa Kemal – An intimate study of a dictator (1932) by Harold Courtenay Armstrong, pp. 199-200“Science is the most real guide for civilisation, for life, for success in the world. To search for a guide other than science is absurdity, ignorance and heresy.” MKAAs quoted in Atatürkçülük, Volume I, General Staff of the Republic of Turkey, Millî Eğitim Basımevi, 1984, p. 283———————————-Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.——————————————

Good answers so far! And I can’t really find fault in them.To add to the body of knowledge here on Quora:What Percentage of the Population Served in WW2?See the link above for a quick review of the, “Statistics on American, German and Japanese forces are not hard to find, but they often refer to those under arms at certain times (e.g., at the start or end of the war) rather than the grand total. A total of 12,209,238 Americans were in military service by September 2, 1945, representing 9 percent of the 131,028,000 U.S. population. Germany had a grand total of 22,000,000 in some form of service out of a population of 69,850,000, representing 31 percent.”Assuming there is academic and historical rigor in those number, and I would give this source 4.5 out of 5 on most any answer…this would mean at the largest single mobilization of total warfighting, human resources, and industrial capacity in American history, fundamentally changing both America and the world as a result of being the Arsenal of Democracy, 30M Americans under arms in the US Armed Forces would:Be greater by a factor of perhaps just about 250% in manpower.Still be about 9% (30M out of c. 325M total US population).Both numbers are my quick calculations only…Let’s expand a bit:There may be roughly 1.5M active duty US military, andThere are roughly 1.2M reservists: ARNGUS, AFNGUS, Inactive National Guard, all flavors of the Title 10 Reserve Component including Selected Reservists, Individual Ready Reservists (IRR), and Standby Reserve, the Coast Guard Reserve, and small numbers of Public Health Service Reservists (it’s a program still in flux). Not all of them are capable of successfully being recalled to arms, even in a extreme, existential, threat to national security:Broken medically/physically/mentally;Classified properly in Key Employer positions [a very small number];Just can’t be found/don’t want to be found — upon an actual mobilization that called their name, they would be IMMEDIATELY DROPPED TO DESERTION, THE “MARK OF DESERTION” APPLIED TO THEIR SERVICE RECORDS, AND A FEDERAL WARRANT ISSUED FOR THEIR ARREST…anywhere in the US or Territories they may be encountered by any law enforcement officer. These Federal warrants are serious business, and essentially include an all-expense paid stay in luxurious local jail-house cells for a few days before the Deserter Squad arrives to escort them, again, all-expenses paid, to their nearest military installation that will handle their further legal reviews usually ending with a Court-Martial and a Federal conviction…but sometimes a Deserter will recant their previous sinful ways and ask to rejoin the ranks of the military.Various other real-world deferrals, delays, and exemptions for hardships, actively serving in the Peace Corps or working currently for a foreign government, are incarcerated (or were incarcerated and now on parole/probation), currently working towards a health services or chaplaincy professional qualification, have to take care of ailing parents and have 10 kids, some others.Throw in some thousands of Merchant Mariners (most of whom hold Navy Reserve commissions in addition to their Master/Mate/Engineer/Pilot/etc. qualifications to run shipping).Add about 7,000 officers from the Public Health Service and the NOAA, which would be mobilized and ordered incorporated into the DoD for a National Emergency of this magnitude. Most of them would continue to do the same work they are already doing, just their parent Secretary would change from Commerce to DoD, etc.Add perhaps 50,000 current college ROTC and Service Academy cadets/midshipman.Add the existing population of the “Delayed Entry Program” where some tens of thousands of people are “waiting” for their chance to ship off to their Service basic training and commence their military careers. While in the DEP, they are already sworn into the military and could be mobilized almost instantaneously (although as untrained, there are certain legal barriers to fully employing them until they have finished at least most of their entry level training pipeline).Throw in somewhere over 2M retirees: from 110 year old veterans of the period before WWII, through WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and everything up to now.Active Component Retirees (they were Regulars in service, and now they are still Regulars on the Retired List, drawing retired or retainer pay, and Regular retirees on the Permanent and Temporary Disability Retired Lists).Reserve Component Retirees (all are part of the Retired Reserve, including those reserve retirees drawing active duty pensions for 20+ years of active duty, reserve retirees already drawing a reserve pension for longevity/age [usually age 60 but sometimes before], reserve retirees who are “grey area” while retired but awaiting retired pay at age 60, and reserve retirees on the Permanent and Temporary Disability Retired Lists).2. At this point, we have roughly 5 million total…all hands on deck including those without hands on the disability lists and those who are elderly, as well as Tier 1 Special Forces.3. Add in the roughly 22 million living veterans (those not retired or currently serving. This gives us STILL LESS THAN 30 MILLION.4. At this point, figuring that:a. With Stop-Loss authorities, you get to keep everyone who already has a commission, warrant, or enlistment of any flavor — all outprocessing and retirements will be suspended for the duration of the national emergency…plus 6 months per Federal law (excepting some of the most egregious legal and medical cases where the Service just can’t keep them…). SO you still have about 1.5M active duty.b. You get to recall to active duty ALL of the flavors of Reservists…and then sort through them to figure out who is a keeper, who can be redeemed given some time and a chance, and who either never showed up or showed up but is either so broken, or has a whopping hardship, or is a Key Employee such that his civilian work is actually more valuable to the war effort than what he could contribute if activated (example: Vice President, members of Congress, Governors, the CEO of Ford or IBM, the Police Commissioner for Washington DC or New York City, scientists on the verge of world-changing break-throughs, etc. “Key employee” doesn’t work for rank and file employees and even most executives until you are get to the rarefied air like those examples I provided — their civilian work has to be far more important to winning a war than being in the military). Say we get to keep 80% of the recalled reservists — that’s about 1M recalled Reservists.c. Pull in many of the Merchant Mariners…say 5,000. (This number is an educated guess on my part…)d. Keep the PHS and NOAA officers in the game. They have specialized skills and duties, but they COULD be ordered to perform a wide range of duties beyond their normal spheres of influence…this is about 7,000.e. Graduate and either commission or enlist many of the ROTC and Service Academy cadets/midshipmen, and accelerate the education for those remaining…say we get 25,000 right now and that many more in the next 3 years.f. Accelerate the DEP, ship them off to basic ASAP. There is a big chokehold with this, because you must provide a certain level of training before they can be used effectively (or outside of CONUS), and it’s hard to ramp up through-put at the various service basic training centers…but it can be done partly by shortening the existing course, graduating those already there early, and pushing hard, very hard, to get more at least partially trained and out to their Service who will have to finish their training: this may yield 25,000 quickly, with perhaps as many more within a year as through-put settles down.g. Now we are at the Retirees: with a National Emergency or declaration of war, the President can involuntarily reach out and recall to active service ALL of the Regular Component retirees, all services including the Coast Guard, Public Health Service, and NOAA. He can also recall ALL Reserve Component retirees, from all branches, whether they are drawing pay or not. And he can recall to duty all the Disability List retirees. Sorting out the lot of them, sure, many are simply too infirm to be of use in any capacity: they go home with our thanks. All retirees are Categorized as I (retired within the last 5 years), II (retired more than 5 years ago), and III (retired on disability). So the Category I will mostly still be usable. Quite a few of the Category II as well, even if some allowances have to be made for some beer bellies, other various ailments, and outdated skills, but still have knowledge and a career’s worth of experiences. Of the Category III, a few will be usable based on their particular medical circumstances, but many will be sent home with our thanks. (I read over a couple of Board for Correction of Military Record applications from WWII where retirees who were recalled were found to be so disabled that reasonable accommodations could be not be made and they were demobilized and sent home…I seem to recall that in both cases the servicemember were very angry because they wanted to do their part, to fight, to “free someone to fight,” but were denied.) Let’s say out of over 2M retirees, we can keep and use about 75% in some capacity, even if it’s handing out basketballs at the gym, teaching classes, something worthy of their grade and experiences (hopefully!)…this is 1.5M total…sort of ready to fight! (And as a retiree myself on the disability list, I’m trying to be honest.)We now have working total of about 4,060,000…or 4.06M in a state of readiness where they could either immediately participate, or at least know what’s what and have a clue, especially after some spin up time and training to bring skills current.Even if we can either: (1) draft, or (2) get volunteers, while bending and waiving all sorts of medical and other background check regulations for new recruits and inductees, more than 25,000,000 additional bodies would be required to reach a projected total Military of 30 million.Summary:Everyone already in, on active duty, stays in for the duration: “Stop-Loss.”Everyone in any sort of entry-level pipeline, from Officer Candidate Schools, ROTC, Academies, the DEP, are going to be expedited to the fullest extent of the training pipelines throughout the Services. Some corners are going to be cut, some rules bent or waived. Quality will suffer initially until the kinks are worked out and the Services have a chance to reestablish a “wartime” training regimen to get the job done.The Coast Guard, PHS, NOAA, and Merchant Marine will, to the extent possible under the laws, be fully mobilized and placed under the control of the DoD to be best utilized according to their unique skills as part of the Total Force.Every reservist, of every Service and every flavor, will be mobilized. Most will show up, and most will do their job with pride and zeal. The rest we don’t want anyway. Let them go to the brig for desertion, or be either discharged expeditiously to clear the rolls, or sent home demobilized if they have bigger problems like how to finish the last year of a $300,000 medical school program…THEN we get them back, as a full Doctor ready to do his part! (And then we can forgive his loans and debt and let him focus on healing others rather than trying to pay off his enormous student loans…)Every retiree, every Service and flavor and age and level of infirmity, will be mobilized. Most will gladly show up and salute the flag, happy for another chance to serve. But, sadly, many will not be able to stay, because they just are more of a danger to themselves, health-wise or lack of current relevant skills-wise, than to an enemy. There will be some super-stars returning to play on the field, some put back onto the injured list and sent home, and quite a few who haven’t played in a while (maybe decades) and need to be put back through spring training for a refresher before final decisions are made whether to cut them and demobilize them with thanks, or keep them in a farm team, on the bench, sent out scouting for new talent or teaching the younger military members, or right back into their old jobs hooking and jabbing or sending electrons down-range without missing a beat because they are still physically, mentally, and skillfully ready to go.And, we will have to activate the draft to get to 30M. Even if every single living Veteran in America signed back up, and was physically, mentally, morally capable of participating, which is utter rubbish as a planning assumption, we would still need more volunteers…or inductees through the draft.Continuing to “assume,” the only reason for a 30M military would be for an existential war, a worst-case scenario that isn’t over so fast it doesn’t matter, but unfolds fast enough and with the clear and present danger that the American way of life will end shortly without drastic measures.And all the above excludes any planning assumptions regarding attrition, desertion, casualties (KIA, WIA, MIA, POW, non-combat medical issues, etc.). With many of the barely over 4M servicemembers already stretching the medical and physical fitness standards as far as they can go, or failing them over time based on demands and their personal situations, their relative time-span to effectively contribute and build an effective military based on 30M means a LOT of training, mentoring, and learning, very quickly.As others noted, and I avoided until now: there is nothing even close in our budget process today that could sustain even simply making the extra 26,000,000 servicemembers straight-leg infantry with broomsticks, let along effectively training them to become nuclear technicians aboard a submarine, avionics techs, Special Forces, cryptologists, any of a thousand other job skills that are needed. I’m not sure we could even afford 26,000,000 broomsticks…it would take scouring the Nation’s supermarket shelves bare, asking the manufacturers (probably our enemy nation at that point…) to ramp up production or having to stand up domestic broomstick production, or just making them on the spot under the watchful eye of the old drill instructors who have to teach the how to soldier while going “bang” every time they go to the field with their “weapon,” their very own broomstick. Or the massive, nation-wide “broomstick” drive to get them from patriotic Americans: “We need your broomsticks, and maybe your other guns and ammo, too, since we don’t have nearly enough and the contracts can’t be fulfilled for another 2–3 years…send your broomsticks, spare rifles,shotguns, pistols, blunderbusses, cavalry sabers, and large knives to your local Victory Center, where our patriotic men and women who answered the call to duty are waiting desperately for your help…Call now, operators are standing by, yes, they may be old retirees who can’t hear well any more, but they are actually not standing by, they are comfortably seated so they don’t fall over…”Cue the Sarah MacLachlan “Angel” music — File:Angel Sarah McLachlan.ogg — with a slick video showing a bunch of these New Warriors standing on the firing range going “bang” with their sad-sack, home-made broomsticks, stacked 8 to a bunk in a submarine because we can’t build them fast enough…guys sleeping in the torpedo tubes, next to the nuclear reactor (maybe it’s warm), making mock cavalry charges using the old Monty Python trick of having the fake horse between your legs as you run while another New Warrior uses two halves of a coconut to “clop, clop” behind, scraping the rust off 50 year old ships in the Ghost Fleet, even trying to reactivate old museum ships like the USS Midway, the Missouri/Iowa/New Jersey/Wisconsin/Alabama, and all the destroyers and cruisers and mine-layers, etc., we would need for the New Navy’s dream of 1,000 ships, while millions of new New Air Forcers swarm over all the golf courses anywhere near any Air Force Base in America…using their broomsticks of course as golf clubs because the golf companies can’t churn out the clubs any faster than the gun companies can make new ones. Since there won’t be enough Air Force planes to accommodate the extra 8 million or so (based on rough percentages of today’s DoD) Airmen for possibly 20 years or more, based on the difficulty of paying this enormous new Manpower bill and Training bill, not to mention the literally billions of rounds of ammunition needed to train them, the dozens/hundreds of new ships the Navy wants funded to replace the old rust buckets they are trying to put back into service, the thousands of tanks and attack helicopters the New Army needs for the roughly 10 million new Soldiers in 100 new Divisions and thousands of BCT’s loaded with next generation Abrams and Bradleys, with more UAVs than commercial planes across the world, and even what the poor New USMC and Coast Guard need for their couple millions of new servicemembers…some airplanes, cutters, buoy tenders, tanks, arty, helos, even a few new bases to accommodate them all so they don’t have to live in tents using…you guessed it…broomsticks as the center pole to hold them up!

What does reenlistment in the military mean? I have seen news of a 42-year-old veteran reenroll and go through basic again.Short Answer: It depends. A lot. On many factors unique to each case.Long Answer: Read on for Quora enlightenment (or boredom, for those so inclined!).In the US Armed Forces, a “reenlistment” means you were already an enlisted member of the armed forces at one time, i.e., you already “enlisted” previously for an initial period of obligated service, although that initial enlisted service could have been in any Service, any enlisted grade, for any length of time.[1][2]Most reenlistments are continuous service, meaning the enlisted member simply completed one period of obligated service, and — without a break — began a new period of obligated service. For some members, reenlistment will occur after a break in service (typically defined by the Services as longer than 90 days). For some, even more exotic “breaks” might be in play. Read on to see behind part of the curtain that shrouds the mysteries of “reenlistments…”[3]But first, some necessary definitions and background to better understand.The Department of Defense is comprised of 5 separate Armed Forces, also known as the military Services (in order of precedence):[4][5]Army,MarinesNavy,Air Force, andSpace Force.[6]The sixth Armed Force and military Service (at all times, per statute) is the:Coast Guard, currently operating in the Department of Homeland Security during peacetime, with a wartime mission of transfer to the Department of the Navy for naval service.[7][8]Each of the Armed Forces is, also, by statute a Uniformed Service. The two additional Uniformed Services consist of the Commissioned Corps of the:[9][10]US Public Health Service (USPHS), established in the Department of Health and Human Services, andNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), established in the Department of Commerce.As of this writing, June 2020, of the eight above listed Uniformed Services, each has a reserve component except the Space Force and the NOAA. The USPHS Ready Reserve Corps has had an “on again, off again” existence over the past decades, but was recently reauthorized.[11] The Space Force is likely to eventually have at least a small reserve, but the Space Force itself will be very small, so other options may emerge to provide a surge capability during sustained combat operations if additional “space forces” (howsoever the individual servicemembers of the USSF shall eventually be official named — my favorite, and the obvious: Spacers…).[12]For all enlisted members, this “reenlistment” is done by a standard contract between the Service and the individual, with the agreed upon terms shown on the contract.[13]Officers are not serving in an enlisted status, although all officers begin their service after appointment with some form of statutorily and contractually obligated service. It would be easy to say “officers are not enlisted,” but the truth is more nuanced, so I shall deviate here — in the interest of answering the Question fully — to illuminate the distinctions, so as to add value to this Answer:The term “officers” most commonly describes those servicemembers who are appointed to grade and rank of Office by the President, or delegated Secretarial authority, by commission or warrant of authority.[14]In the US Armed Forces, officers appointed to grades Chief Warrant Officer-2 (W-2) and above are commissioned, and are Constitutionally “Officers of the United States,” and while the “Office upon which entered” might be only a fictional place, each such commission will (eventually, once the written document catches up to the officer…) be accompanied by a parchment scroll (commonly known as the “commissioning scroll”), signed and dated by the:President for some officers (Regulars of the DoD in grades O-4 through O-10, Reserves of the DoD in grades O-6 through O-10),Secretary of Defense for others (Regulars of the DoD in grades W-2 through O-3, Reserves of the DoD in grades W-2 through [15]Officers (both Regulars and Reserves) appointed to the grade of Warrant Officer-1 (W-1) are warranted (by SecDef for DoD, SecDHS for USCG), and while in most respects have the authorities, respect, and customs and courtesies extended to commissioned officers, do have certain limits placed by legal considerations, and in the absence of a commission are not Constitutional “Officers of the United States.”[16]There are also uncommissioned officers, who by long-standing custom have many of the characteristics of commissioned officers, but do not rank with them, and in the last century their status has slowly declined in spite of certain remaining aspects that signify their status:[17]Cadets and Midshipmen are appointed by the President to their Offices, but lacking commissions (or warrants since 1912), yet retaining inchoate officer status as recognized by an unbroken string of court decisions over the last 200+ years, and the lack of a commission means they cannot be Constitutional “Officers of the United States.”[18]The Cadets and Midshipmen of the Service Academies (Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard) are — by definition — neither commissioned or warranted officers, nor are they enlisted members. They exist in a special gray area, carved out explicitly for them, as inchoate officers:Cadets and midshipmen are neither commissioned officers nor enlisted personnel; they occupy a unique status between the two.199 Army regulations place the rank of a cadet below commissioned and warrant officers, but above enlisted ranks.200 Cadets have been referred to as “inchoate” officers, and generally must be afforded the legal rights and courtesies accorded to a commissioned officer.201[19]Having been relieved of line authority in operations, Cadets and Midshipmen yet remain subject to the bright-line test of “officership”: they must act as officers, or violate Article 138 of the UCMJ, Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentlemen. Only commissioned officers, cadets, and midshipmen are subject to Article 138 — not even Warrant Officers-1 are subject to this beacon of expected officership.[20]Further, like other commissioned and warranted officers, cadets and midshipmen cannot be separated punitively by a special court-martial — only a General Court-Martial (GCM) has sufficient jurisdiction to discharge them from the Service. And if convicted by a GCM, commissioned officers (W-2 and up), Cadets, and Midshipmen are dismissed from the Service, as opposed to Warrant Officers (W-1) and enlisted members being dishonorably discharged from the Service. See Rule for Court-Martial 1003(c)(2)(A).[21]And, as signified right in their title, noncommissioned and petty officers are delegated a sliver of Constitutional authority, and several centuries of common law and custom has brought forward their authority in a “Publick Office.”[22] Each of the Services defines its NCO’s and PO’s slightly differently, but each is empowered with significant authority, as recognized in the treatment of disobeying, disrespecting, or assaulting NCO’s/PO’s under the UCMJ, and in the inherent authority granted to NCO’s/PO’s to apprehend violators of the UCMJ, quell affrays, and otherwise take command when required.[23][24]The above classes of officers now defined, however, the inevitable loopholes, wormholes, black holes, etc., open up the need for yet more definitions before we return to the original Question:Temporary commissions (and warrants). Various laws provide for the temporary appointment of both civilians (without military status), and enlisted members, and those already holding a commission or warrant, to a temporary grade above their permanent grade (or lack thereof for a civilian).[25]In the past, this was more common, and entire classes of officers, both commissioned and warranted, held entirely different sets of status, on the one hand they were “officers,” yet the other hand showed them as “enlisted.” And further complicating matters, the commission (or warrant) was often granted in the reserve component, while the permanent status remained as Regulars (although there times this could be reversed, to even more confusion…).[26]This state of affairs often resulted in temporary officers (especially of the reserve component), serving for some specified or indefinite period of time on active duty, while they simultaneously served an enlisted contract in the active component, and at times were considered for promotion in both statuses…confusion reigned.The Army ceased the practice by the 1990’s of having soldiers serve simultaneously with a reserve commission and a regular enlistment, and the enactment of the Warrant Officer Management Act, or WOMA (along with the Defense Officer Personnel Management Act [DOPMA] and the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act [ROPMA], all from the late 1980’s and early 1990’s), greatly reduced the use and need in the Services for continued bifurcated status between temporary officer and permanent enlisted, or reserve officer and regular enlisted, or temporary officer and permanent warrant officer, etc.[27]As an example: the Army’s previous Dual Component Personnel Management Program, under (now obsolete) Army Regulation 600–39, provided the Army’s guidance on appointment of serving Regular Army enlisted members with exceptional potential to commissioned status as second lieutenants (or higher grades in specific instances) in the Army Reserve, with the end goal to prepare the soldier to assume an officer’s role during full mobilization in time of war or national emergency, after which they would revert to their underlying Regular Army warrant officer or enlisted status.[28]See Richard Cooper’s excellent Quora Answer on this topic: In the 1980’s, when I was an enlisted soldier in the regular army, I had a sergeant I served with say he also held a reserve officers commission. Was that really possible?However, the Navy and Coast Guard remain keen on the use, even today, of temporary commissions/warrants, as a means of providing officers, yet withholding their “permanent” appointment until certain amounts of time and/or other actions are completed.[29] [30]And there are also pockets, here and there, of specialized officers even today with temporary commissions, such as the officers appointed to lead the Marine Band and the Marine Drum and Bugle Corps, provisions of which are embedded in law and stretch back decades.[31] [32]In the event of a temporary commission (or warrant), the underlying permanent status of the member doesn’t change, so there are, in fact, some officers who hold grade and rank as commissioned or warranted officers, and are treated in most things as if they held permanent grade and rank, but in truth are temporary placeholders in that grade/rank while their permanent status is something else, most often a senior enlisted status as an NCO/PO.[33]Cadets and Midshipmen of the Senior ROTC Program (Army, Air Force, Navy/Marine). Unlike the cadets and midshipmen of the Service Academies, the SROTC cadets and midshipmen hold a dual-status: all must be, by law, enlisted into the reserve component of their Service before they may take Office as a cadet or midshipman, and are appointed using delegated Presidential authority by their Service Secretaries, not directly by the hand of the President himself.[34]While the general expectations of officership are levied upon SROTC cadets and midshipmen, and are enforced administratively at all times, only Navy SROTC midshipmen are subject to the UCMJ, and then only when under official orders to active (or inactive) duty for training. (This is a quirk of the combination of the former Army and Navy sets of disciplinary regulations during the amalgamation of the UCMJ in 1950, where the Navy formerly asserted disciplinary authority over reserves while the Army did not…some of that made its way into the UCMJ, where it has resided for 70 years.)[35]However, for most purposes, there is no other distinction made between the inchoate officers of the SROTC, and their inchoate officer comrades of the Service Academies, as neither are commissioned or warranted as officers, today hold line authority, or can be Constitutional “Officers of the United States” in the absence of a commission.With that historical and definitional treatise out of the way, exposing the Byzantine inner workings of officer appointments and overlaps with enlisted status (more common than is readily acknowledged), we return to the original Question:What does reenlistment in the military mean? I have seen news of a 42-year-old veteran reenroll and go through basic again.As noted above, “reenlistment” is the process of enlisting — again, having once enlisted before — into one of the Armed Forces, either the active component (Regular) or reserve component.[36] Recall, also, that the two statutory Uniformed Services, USPHS and NOAA, do not have enlisted (or warrant officer) members at all, only commissioned officers and civilian officers and employees of those Services.[37]The “standard” reenlistment is:[38]Currently serving servicemember wishes to continue serving, maintain their career progression, etc.Their military command counsels them and coordinates up the chain to ensure that not only is the member qualified to reenlist, but there is a vacancy into which they may reenlist. Many first-term members do not wish to reenlist, and so end their current period of obligated service (whether reserve or active). But others do wish to reenlist, and their Service must determine if there is a “boatspace,” “billet,” etc., within that Service’s second (and subsequent) term career management opportunities. Depending on their grade, Service, training, special skills, even those who wish to reenlist may not be permitted to do so. Or, their career field may be wide open to reenlistments and they are welcomed as a “careerist” after their reenlistment with open arms. It depends on many factors.[39]Upon approval of the reenlistment, the DD-4 Enlistment/Reenlistment form is completed, along with various other forms.[40]The servicemember is discharged — technically — for a brief window (and they may be given the chance to speak as a civilian before the words of the reenlistment document are read aloud…the smart civilian in that situation says nothing to jeopardize the next 3 minutes when their career will reignite and continue…).[41]The member is then reenlisted, and restates the Oath of Enlistment.[42]Their career continues, in a “career path” track as established by their Service’s manpower management.There are variations on this theme, though:As part of the reenlistment process, they may be denied reenlistment in their present specialty, but offered reenlistment (a “lateral move”) to another career field.As part of the reenlistment process, other factors such as bonuses, duty station preferences, training courses, etc., may be included…or not, as the situation evolves.Transferring during the initial 8-year Military Service Obligation,[43] the statutory initial service contract, from the active component to the reserve component, or vice versa, is not technically “reenlistment,” but there may be incentives, lateral moves to new specialties, even bonuses or duty station guarantees involved.A member who may have already reenlisted once, i.e., they are a “careerist,” may reenlist a second, third, or more times, whether in the active or reserve component, and each reenlistment may involve not only approvals, but also certain negotiation about any incentives such as training, duty stations, bonuses, etc.And then, there are the extreme outlier cases of “reenlistment,” where the individual might not have served in any military status (active or reserve) for quite some time (perhaps even years), and must be “brought back online” in many ways as if they had never served, their “reenlistment” treated more like an initial enlistment because of the true “break in service” that took their career off line. Such “reenlistments” typically require a new security background clearance, new medical waivers and examinations, providing many documents to reestablish qualifications, etc. These situations may — or may not — result in the member beginning service at their previous grade (or specialty), as the Service may determine that approval of the request is contingent on the individual serving at a lower (or higher) grade, or a different job specialty, or at undesirable duty stations, etc.A variation of this theme is a prior-enlisted service member, who then is appointed and serves at least their minimum obligated service as a commissioned or warrant officer, but for some reason requests to be “reenlisted” (or “revert” in some regulations) to their former enlisted status:[44]The officer fails selection or otherwise is involuntarily denied further officer service due to a reason such as a Reduction-in-Force, and requests “reenlistment” to continue their service, orThe officer had previously resigned their commission/warrant, and was completely without military status, but for some reason requested to “reenlist” to again serve. This might occur not just for personal reasons, but if the former officer was no longer qualified for a commission/warrant, but could still qualify to serve as an enlisted member, as there are certain requirements that apply only to officers.Each Service has internal procedures to evaluate the requests/applications from officers or former officers who request to “enlist/reenlist” in either the active or reserve component (with approval more likely, but not guaranteed in any case, in the reserves).[45]Each Service also works with law and regulations pertaining to age, with a bewildering array of differences, exceptions, waivers, etc., defining the maximum age for enlistment/reenlistment/appointment. In general, it is easier for a prior-service member to again serve, and it is easier to again serve enlisted than as an officer, but no guarantees are made based on individual circumstances and the various laws and regulations that apply, the fitness of the applicant, etc.[46]See the below graphic, which is not definitive, in and of itself, because there can be waivers even to these rules:(Image courtesy of: How Old Can You Be When Enlisting?)As for a requirement to “go through basic again,” from the OP’s original Question:What About Basic Training?When you want to re-enlist, in order to get prior service, you must have 6-months of post basic-training experience at minimum. You may have to go back to basic training even if you do have 180 days in the military if you were still in AIT or ADT. The branch you’re entering can also determine whether or not you’re going to do basic training again. Many military branches also consider the time you have spent away from service as a factor (even though many won’t tell you this).With the Marines, you’re more than likely going to have to go through Boot Camp again, especially if you’re transferring from another branch. In the Army, other branch members (except for the Marine Corps) will have to attend a special course. Marines will only have to do the course if they have spent more than three years out of service. The Navy requires that basic training is literally a case-by-case basis, and if someone’s joining the Air Force with prior service, most soldiers will attend a familiarization course, although some of the soldiers will have to go through basic training again anyway.The Coast Guard is a special case in which a non-Coast Guard branch that has served 2 or more years of active duty service will only have to go to a 30-day basic camp, while anyone else with less than two years will have to do the full training course.(Courtesy of: Can You Rejoin the Military?)As the author of that article noted, the Service may decide who has to repeat basic training/boot camp, or an abbreviated version in some Services, as well as deciding whether retraining in their original (or a new) MOS or job specialty is required.The longer the individual has been discharged, the more likely they are to require “remedial” training, whether the entire “Initial Active Duty for Training” package of basic training followed by MOS courses and any other Service-specific training, or merely On the Job Training (OJT).But no single case is absolutely definitive, because a veteran may have left the Service years ago, but return having obtained very specialized and in demand skills, perhaps as a medical professional, or a scientist, or a cyber or space operator.The Services have the authority not only waive many rules, but request specific statutory waivers from Congress if necessary, and for many officers reappoint at least to their previous commissioned/warrant grade, if not higher based on their skills and the Service’s need. For those who are enlisted/reenlisted, the Services have nearly plenary authority to determine the grade in which enlisted/reenlisted, subject to only a few laws, because most enlisted manpower management is explicitly left to the Services. In such cases, a highly qualified prior-service (even many years ago) might be reenlisted (or enlisted, if they had only served as an officer) directly in pay grade E-6 or even E-7, without need of entry level training. (Congress requires that appointment to E-8 requires at least 8 years of service, and appointment to E-9 requires 10 years of service, but even those are merely laws that could be waived in extreme cases if pushed by a Service…).BOTTOM LINE: after all of this background, and discussion, here is (finally) the certain verdict, and Answer to the Question — “It depends. On many factors unique to each case.”Footnotes[1] 10 U.S. Code § 508 - Reenlistment: qualifications[2] 10 U.S. Code § 12101 - Definition[3] https://www.presby.edu/doc/military/DDForm-4.pdf[4] 10 U.S. Code § 101 - Definitions[5] https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN20654_R600_25_Admin_FINAL.pdf[6] Q&A: Nukes, Space Force, and Change - Air Force Magazine[7] 14 U.S. Code § 101 - Establishment of Coast Guard[8] 14 U.S. Code § 103 - Department in which the Coast Guard operates[9] 42 U.S. Code § 201 - Definitions[10] 33 U.S. Code § 3002 - Definitions[11] USPHS Ready Reserve Corps Becomes Law With the CARES Act[12] Senators Endorse Space Force Reserve But Question Guard - Air Force Magazine[13] CERTIFICATE OF RELEASE OR DISCHARGE FROM ACTIVE DUTY (DD FORM 214/5 SERIES)[14] https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/URLs_Cited/OT2016/15-1251/15-1251-1.pdf[15] commissioned officers of the armed forces[16] 10 U.S. Code § 571 - Warrant officers: grades[17] https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/officers-united-states-within-meaning-appointments-clause, p. 15[18] Commissioning Officers[19] Untitled Page[20] https://jsc.defense.gov/Portals/99/Documents/2019%20MCM%20(Final)%20(20190108).pdf?ver=2019-01-11-115724-610, p. A2-47[21] https://jsc.defense.gov/Portals/99/Documents/2019%20MCM%20(Final)%20(20190108).pdf?ver=2019-01-11-115724-610, p. II-150[22] https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/URLs_Cited/OT2016/15-1251/15-1251-1.pdf, p. 22[23] https://jsc.defense.gov/Portals/99/Documents/2019%20MCM%20(Final)%20(20190108).pdf?ver=2019-01-11-115724-610[24] https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Publications/ncobackbone.pdf, p. 14[25] TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS IN OFFICER GRADES[26] https://ahec.armywarcollege.edu/documents/Temporary_Promotions_of_U.S._Army_Officers.pdf[27] DOPMA/ROPMA Reference[28] AR 600-39 1986 (OBSOLETE) : Dual component personnel management program. :: Obsolete Military Manuals[29] https://www.secnav.navy.mil/doni/directives/01000%20military%20personnel%20support/01-400%20promotion%20and%20advancement%20programs/1420.1B%20OPNAV.pdf[30] https://media.defense.gov/2018/May/16/2001917927/-1/-1/0/CIM_1100_2F.PDF[31] The United States Marine Drum & Bugle Corps[32] https://www.marines.mil/Portals/1/Publications/SECNAVINST%201412.9B.pdf[33] 10 U.S. Code § 603 - Appointments in time of war or national emergency[34] 10 U.S. Code § 2107 - Financial assistance program for specially selected members[35] 10 U.S. Code § 802 - Art. 2. Persons subject to this chapter[36] https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/130426p.pdf?ver=2018-10-26-085822-050[37] What's in a Name? Demystifying the Collective Services[38] https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN19733_R601_280_FINAL.pdf[39] https://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/reference/milpersman/1000/1100Recruitinig/Documents/1160-030.pdf[40] https://www.uab.edu/armyrotc/images/DD_Form_4_-_1-2.pdf[41] https://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/reference/milpersman/1000/1100Recruitinig/Documents/1160-020.pdf[42] 10 U.S. Code § 502 - Enlistment oath: who may administer[43] 10 U.S. Code § 651 - Members: required service[44] https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN7242_P601_280_FINAL.pdf[45] https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/131203p.pdf?ver=2018-12-28-080819-550[46] Army Age Limit For 2020: Limits For Reserve, Enlisted, And Officers