[Rhodes22-list] Political:Off to Iraq re: Brad

[3drecon at comcast.net]

Brad,
     I am sure everyone can find some soldier or another who did it for the money, the bonus etc.  There are those who had joined for the education benefits, I saw them on the news, and were flabbergasted they were to be deployed with their units.  They would plead their single parenthood or whatever.  Some of that I blame on the Department of Defense and some on the politicians for turning the military into a social experiment.  The money and benefits surely sweetens the pot, but most of us joined for better reasons.  I told my mother when I was 10 I wanted to be a soldier.  I didn't know a soldier in the Army from a bell ringer in the  Salvation Army.  I didn't know about bonuses and at that time was told privates made $75.00 per month.  I didn't care.  My parents tried to talk me out of it for the next seven years until I joined (they were separated and it's the only thing I remember them ever agreeing on).  Most of the soldiers I know would do what they are doing for a lot less
 than they get.  As a matter of fact, give us back our medical, Post Exchange (we still have them but Walmart is better in price and product), Commissaries (see Post Exchange); reinstate the Morale Welfare operations and we can get along fine on a lot less money.  Some of the problem is pay has increased proportionately with the decline in services on post.  Now we have to use the local economy to accomplish what we used to have on post at local economy prices.  Most of the club system is gone or diminished and retirements have been eroded.  Soldiers still come, our morale is high and we believe in the mission.  We go where and when our country sends us.  The historians and politicians can debate the wisdom of the operation.

Philip


-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Brad Haslett" <flybrad at gmail.com> 

> Phillip, 
> 
> You are missing the point. Read between the lines. The implication is 
> that our soldiers only fight for the money or they're too stupid to find 
> employment in the private sector. Don't even waste your time defending the 
> issue. It's all a hangover from the Vietnam era but they'll never admit it 
> until their ass is on the line. 
> 
> Remember, "Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because 
> rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." 
> 
> Brad 
> 
> On 10/26/06, 3drecon at comcast.net <3drecon at comcast.net> wrote: 
> > 
> > Dave, 
> > Look, I've been doing this, active duty, USMC and Army, Army Reserves 
> > and CT Army National Guard (I have an anniversary comming up) and I know 
> > what is usual and not. I also know what these guys get paid, 
> > generally. SPEC OPS Navy may have trouble recruiting officers. They just 
> > decided to create a "fighting" land battalion. The Army may pay bonuses to 
> > enlisted folks, but only for hard to recruit positions. They will pay 
> > reenlistment bonuses because a trained experienced Specialist 4 or Corporal 
> > is more valuable to them than a raw recruit, though they too are necessary. 
> > The soldiers in the combat zone receive a tax break, recently updated 
> > to keep up with the increased pay (it used to be full for enlisted and $500 
> > for officers. It has been increased to $7000 per month or so). The break 
> > seems to deliberately cover lower grades in full; those who would be more 
> > likely to be in the "heat of battle" as opposed to the senior guys who 
> > direct the battle. 
> > The extra pay includes combat pay, hazardous duty pay, overseas pay, 
> > family separation pay, jump pay (if you are on jump status), flight pay, 
> > submarine pay etc. This is not all inclusive. Some of these special pays 
> > have only been recently increased. I have known a few soldiers who would go 
> > to the AOR just to collect the extra pay, but mostly it is a perk for those 
> > in their regular rotation. Many volunteer to go sooner than later to "get 
> > it over with" and collect the extra pay to boot. I've known a couple of 
> > guys who went early so they could get a better assignment earlier and 
> > wouldn't have to go again for two years or so. It depends upon the 
> > person. None of these guys are trying to get rich in the service. They 
> > have so diminished the benefits and retirement that in a discussion with 
> > several officers we observed that at one time, you could survey a group of 
> > soldiers in a room and 60% to 70% would indicate they are in for a 
> > career. Now (this conversation was two y 
> > ears a 
> > go but holds up to-day) you would be lucky if 30% held the same 
> > position. It has more to do with the economy, the erosion of benefits and 
> > health care that they don't see it as worth it. I think Bill hit it 
> > partially right too that sergeants will get out and triple their pay as a 
> > contractor doing what they did on active duty. That is part of the economy 
> > element. 
> > 
> > Philip 
> > 
> > -------------- Original message -------------- 
> > From: DCLewis1 at aol.com 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Philip, 
> > > 
> > > $150/mo doesn't seem like a lot of $ to you or I, but to a young 
> > Corporal 
> > > it's a lot of beer. 
> > > 
> > > I personally know an Army wife who is quite happy to have her husband 
> > posted 
> > > to Afghanistan because of the additional $. Seems crazy to me (will this 
> > > marriage last?), but it's true. 
> > > 
> > > Dave 
> > > __________________________________________________ 
> > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list 
> > __________________________________________________ 
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list 
> > 
> __________________________________________________ 
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list