Posted on 12/02/2013 2:01:31 AM PST by darrellmaurina
Big-ticket weapons like aircraft carriers and the F-35 fighter jet have to be part of any conversation about cutting Pentagon spending to satisfy the mandatory budget reductions known as the sequester. But compensation for military personnel has to be on the table, too — even though no other defense issue is more politically volatile or emotionally fraught.
After a decade of war, the very idea of cutting benefits to soldiers, sailors and Marines who put their lives on the line seems ungrateful. But America’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is over or winding down, and the Pentagon is obliged to find nearly $1 trillion in savings over 10 years. Tough choices will be required in all parts of the budget. Compensation includes pay, retirement benefits, health care and housing allowances. It consumes about half the military budget, and it is increasing.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Not allow someone to marry?
It might not be popular to say this, but those are still US citizens.
Why?
After all, the military contributes a lot to this country while the welfare parasites contribute less than nothing.
When are these so-called experts going to realize you can’t compare military service with the civilian sector.
They are not even close.
Indeed. . .one reads all the time about how shameful it is we have military enlistees receiving food stamps but at the same time we are treated to this garbage that somehow the military is over-paid and over-compensated.
Sheesh. . .
With you.
During my time I saw many a young man get his life off the rails because of a marriage before he was ready.
Many times it was the local gal that did the trapping (’get me outta here’), and poor Sammy Soldier was homesick, thinking he is all manly (’tough soldier’) and he got laid (possibly for the first time and then thinks he is in love).
In order to get a little closer to being able to fight two simultaneous wars against real opponents, which has been until recently the national defense strategy.
In the Baraqqi economy, with so few jobs especially for young folks, the military has a big attraction. Like any employer they have “leverage” in a bad market.
So you think we need to be ready to fight a ground war against China and someone else? And you think two or three more divisions will do it?
I think our military is that superior, 3 dimensionally. Yes. Would I prefer 5 instead of 3? Sure.
“. . . you bet that Tommy sees!”
Kudos. Kipling.
Visit the NY Times editorial and read comments.
Commenting closed.
Some to many comments were, apparently withheld, either due to lack of moderators, or deferred to some editorial review.
I know that is true for my post. Had NYTimes cleared my comment within hours of the post, probably would have yielded better reading and rating than what it got delayed a day and released en masse. Smothered. Obamacare isn’t the only website which can’t deal with customers.
But, hey, eventually, my post appeared . . . when NY Times closed out comment. So, it goes.
If I had a dime for all of the Jarheads I knew in my career who fell in love (and wanted to marry) whores overseas.... well I’d have a lot of dimes.
As a career Army chaplain, I can only say that you're information couldn't be more wrong. American citizenship rights are not given up in the military.
"In uniform" means that you have free speech rights when not in uniform. And the only reason the uniform matters is so you don't give the impression you're speaking on behalf of the government.
Your judicial rights aren't violated at all. Anyone can call for a judicial instead of a non-judicial hearing.
You can quit the military when your contract is up, and often before it's up, depending on the circumstances.
Perhaps I’m not communicating as well as I should but when you sign the contract to join the military it is a unique situation unlike any other in the civilian businessworld. In order to keep good order and discipline throughout the military you do not get to enjoy all the freedoms of American citizenship. Some of those things I have pointed out in earlier threads. I feel that adding one more that in the past has been used (not allowing members of the military to marry until they are of a certain rank, say E-5) would help solve a lot of problems in the military while simultaneously slashing some of the military budget. The amount of money spent on family services in the military is a pretty big chunk of dough.
I personally would rather see something like this done before they started slashing F-35s out of service. However, I think we can both agree that there is a lot of waste, fraud and abuse that goes on in the military that can be looked at also.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.