• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What should military members be willing to sacrifice first?

What should military members be willing to sacrifice first?


  • Total voters
    27
And what of those who have done nothing for this country?

What fo they sacrifice?

You already sacrificed. Its honorable to stand up and say you will again.

But until everyone else does, you should not have to.

:shrug: let me know how the entitlement (medicare/medicaid, social security) reform debates go. those are coming too.
 
Last edited:
And what of those who have done nothing for this country?

What fo they sacrifice?

You already sacrificed. Its honorable to stand up and say you will again.

But until everyone else does, you should not have to.

Well, just like when we volunteered the first time when no one else would. We will end up doing it again. Do you really think politicians are going to give up their cushy retirement? Or any other Federal employee for that matter? Nope. We're always the first to get looked at. I think it's because we aren't unionized, not that we should be. So what we need to do is volunteer what we will give up so that it's on our own terms. If not, puppets like Leon Panetta will continue to give and give and give.
 
Well certainly that is not the case of those in the military (something for nothing). Though I do think they can be classified as entitlements, I would be hesitant to use that word to describe benefits to the military because of the negative connotation. ****, I wish we had a budget surplus so we could give them more.

What I describe as an entitlement is everything that was contractually promised to the Service Member, or due compensation for injury or health issues attributed directly to Military Service. If, for example, the Army promised a Soldier 20,000 dollars, and put it on their contract, they better cough up that money. If the GI Bill is a part of a Service Members contract, the VA better pay up. If a Soldier got injured in the line of duty, they better fix him/her.
 
I'd agree with that. In times of plenty, sure, I love the fact that I have the option to "retire" at 44. In times where we are staring at a stark budget? How can I ask my friends and family to work hard from age 44 to age 67 to send me a check twice a month for doing nothing? But you bring this up and folks act like you are asking them to murder children. No, man, I'm breaking the myth that you are so uber-special. You got the GI Bill to help you out post-military, a million other side benefits from the States, the VA, etc; and we don't have the money to get the Cadillac deals anymore.
But, I don't think benefits should be given and taken away based on the (admittedly) realities of the current budget situation. The people who serve are individuals as well who deserve to have their promises upheld. I'll grant that some of my opinion in this regard does have to do with the fact that they're military, but it's also how I feel we should treat promises and obligations to people across-the-board.

If you want to say, "Take away X benefit", that's fine to me if it is for anybody signing on the proverbial dotted line today forward. I would not be in favor of taking away a benefit to anybody retroactively, who worked in good faith that they had X-Y-Z waiting for them at the end.

ETA: As part of a contractual obligation.
 
Last edited:
I'd agree with that. In times of plenty, sure, I love the fact that I have the option to "retire" at 44. In times where we are staring at a stark budget? How can I ask my friends and family to work hard from age 44 to age 67 to send me a check twice a month for doing nothing? But you bring this up and folks act like you are asking them to murder children. No, man, I'm breaking the myth that you are so uber-special. You got the GI Bill to help you out post-military, a million other side benefits from the States, the VA, etc; and we don't have the money to get the Cadillac deals anymore.

It's hard to field this issue without sounding like an arrogant ego-maniac but I will try.

When you look at the full picture, the broad view. What you get out of military service vs. what you get by staying out of military service. It is easy to see why so many attend the parades but never actually march in one. I served between 1988-1992, my initial take home pay was just over 5 hundred dollars a month I believe. I received free medical care but every time I had to utilize it, my injuries were in direct result of my duties. I suppose if my appendix burst while I was in uniform that might have been a nice 'benefit'. These injuries, no matter whose fault or the nature of, can never be compensated in a court of law via a lawsuit by the way. My military career ended because someone I never met wasn't paying attention when he packed my parachute. He was court martialed due to the gross negligence involved, tossed out on his ear with a dishonorable discharge. I will never know his name and if I did, I could never sue him. Go Go Army Health Care!

I received free housing, I lived in a barracks and shared a room with someone I really didn't like. I'm a likable guy, this guy was an inconsiderate ass. Sparing much detail here, I'd of rather been allowed to sleep outside behind the barracks. Uniforms? Haircuts? The Army issued me 2 pairs of BDUs and gave me X dollars for a clothing allowance yearly. When I was done crawling under barbed wire (constantia) wire, cutting through it or breaching it via other ways. My uniforms would be 'unserviceable' due to rips and rends in them and I had to replace them out of pocket. The clothing allowance was laughable. I had to pay for my own haircuts at about 8 bucks twice a month. Later 10 bucks a week.

I was transferred to another unit where the training was at a far faster pace, we'd deploy for training for up to 3 months with no prior warning given. I was issued 6 pairs of BDUs and 4 additional pairs of boots and I shredded through them as if they were paper and I had to pay to replace them. Never mind I was 'ordered' to jump into a wire perimeter in a flak jacket so the rest of my squad could run across my back. Never mind I was stuck there until the sun came up and the exercise declared over and someone finally came to cut me free of the wire, I had to pay to replace the uniform, $40.00 I think. Jump pay was nice but $100.00 a month hardly covered the additional risk we put ourselves through. I'm not going to go into the injuries you exposed yourself to while doing that or the additional risk you placed yourself in should your unit deploy in a real deal situation.

Add to all that the way you were just expected to lay all your constitutional protections aside concerning the legal system. It was explained to me and I signed the form when told to, but thinking back, I'm positive I didn't understand the depth of what I was actually signing away.

Sorry if this is sounding snivelly but if anyone is going to put to me the question of what I am willing to give back? Then I have to ask them, why didn't they join the military? Most those people watching the fictional parade I mentioned above will answer, if they do honestly, "I had better things to do than serve my country in uniform."

I served in the Infantry and to the absolute limit of my ability. There are many people in the Army and through all the branches of service, who have it easier cushy even. Their duties not as dangerous or physically demanding. File clerks, Payroll personnel, etc. They said when I was in the Army it took 9 support soldiers to place one man in the field. Those support folks are very important but when you think of people who have it easy in the military, cross the boots on the ground folks off the list. Just a friendly recommendation.

Playing too much with the retirement age would be tricky as it's hard to retain people in fields that do more physical work and are more demanding. It would be harder to grow an Infantry soldier (E-1) into a higher ranking Non-Commissioned Officer (E-6, E-7, E-8) if he had nothing to look forward to for 2-3-4-5-6 enlistments (I hope I counted high enough) than work that would be considered unreasonable by civilian standards, a salary that is well below his experience by private sector standards and a family who has been bounced around the globe and generally not happy about it if he managed to keep a family together. Those high ranking NCO's practically run the military and you have to retain them somehow. And they are now true adults on which extra propaganda fails to work upon.

Longwinded, must stop typing when tired.
 
Last edited:
Dude, I'm sorry. I had a bad cigarette roll one time... but crash landing? That sucks bro. Reminds me of an old saw I heard once: "If the only way in is to jump.... find another way in."


You are right that we have to cover alot of stuff out of pocket - but that is true for almost any profession. Businessmen gotta wear suits and ties, and have them dry-cleaned. But their housing allowances arent' tax-free.


I wouldn't mind a little extra duty pay for the grunts; but given the lat-movers in and out of different MOS's, it strikes me you can't really treat them as different services. And you are right that NCO's and SNCO's run the actual military itself. But it's also worth pointing out that you get alot of guys at the 17 year mark who hate their lives, hate their service, suck at their jobs, and are only there because "I only got three left". :shrug: it happens.

But we're at the point now where major cuts are coming - and we can cut the nice benefits, or we can cut the gear and training that helps us do our job. I'd rather have a well-trained rigger who will have to wait until he's 55 to draw his retirement pay than an inexperienced but well-compensated one.
 
But we're at the point now where major cuts are coming - and we can cut the nice benefits, or we can cut the gear and training that helps us do our job. I'd rather have a well-trained rigger who will have to wait until he's 55 to draw his retirement pay than an inexperienced but well-compensated one.

I think we can make cuts without doing either of those. Give the job to a Prior Service who knows how the military operates, and base the cuts on waste, and what isn't needed. This is assuming that Obama and the Congress actually care enough to take the time to listen to service Members. I'm not holding my breath on that, though.
 
Dude, I'm sorry. I had a bad cigarette roll one time... but crash landing? That sucks bro. Reminds me of an old saw I heard once: "If the only way in is to jump.... find another way in."

You are right that we have to cover alot of stuff out of pocket - but that is true for almost any profession. Businessmen gotta wear suits and ties, and have them dry-cleaned. But their housing allowances arent' tax-free.

I wouldn't mind a little extra duty pay for the grunts; but given the lat-movers in and out of different MOS's, it strikes me you can't really treat them as different services. And you are right that NCO's and SNCO's run the actual military itself. But it's also worth pointing out that you get alot of guys at the 17 year mark who hate their lives, hate their service, suck at their jobs, and are only there because "I only got three left". :shrug: it happens.

But we're at the point now where major cuts are coming - and we can cut the nice benefits, or we can cut the gear and training that helps us do our job. I'd rather have a well-trained rigger who will have to wait until he's 55 to draw his retirement pay than an inexperienced but well-compensated one.
I saw a lot of that when I served. I also noted at the time that many of these people were in their mid-to-late-30s and looked like they were mid-60s.

Note: I served in the mid-1980s, and while you did have to show some positive advancement and progress to stay in, the only real criteria for doing your 20 was not screwing up.
 
Dude, I'm sorry. I had a bad cigarette roll one time... but crash landing? That sucks bro. Reminds me of an old saw I heard once: "If the only way in is to jump.... find another way in."


You are right that we have to cover alot of stuff out of pocket - but that is true for almost any profession. Businessmen gotta wear suits and ties, and have them dry-cleaned. But their housing allowances arent' tax-free.


I wouldn't mind a little extra duty pay for the grunts; but given the lat-movers in and out of different MOS's, it strikes me you can't really treat them as different services. And you are right that NCO's and SNCO's run the actual military itself. But it's also worth pointing out that you get alot of guys at the 17 year mark who hate their lives, hate their service, suck at their jobs, and are only there because "I only got three left". :shrug: it happens.

But we're at the point now where major cuts are coming - and we can cut the nice benefits, or we can cut the gear and training that helps us do our job. I'd rather have a well-trained rigger who will have to wait until he's 55 to draw his retirement pay than an inexperienced but well-compensated one.

Pardons if I went off, it was overly late.

A robot can pack those chutes 100% correctly every time. If not 100% a far better percent than the folks in the riggers sheds do. I had a "Mae West" of all things, night jump, 120+ pound ruck strapped across my thighs and a SAW in it's weapon case strapped to my right leg. The malfunction should have been cake to clear only when it started to clear, the risers moved to say the right sphere, what was the left collapsed. I now had a much smaller "Mae West". I wasn't free falling but I was descending far too rapidly. I quickly prepared to release my ruck but around the time I got my hands on the release straps, the ground decided to enter the ballet.

All your points are right on target. My suits were/are expensive my dry cleaning bill for my shirts alone was insane. As a Spec-4 I made exactly what a Spec-4 clerk made in some other unit, minus Jump Pay. There should be a pay increase for those in 'high output, high risk' Military Occupation Specialties, or whatever the other branches of service name them. Not only do the 3 year from retirement guys have that attitude but they talk about it openly, maybe not in my old unit but certainly in others.

Pushing retirement back 5 or even 10 years doesn't sound unreasonable, depending how it's done. I'm sure you realize that tinkering with the benefits the troops get will hurt recruitment in a large way if done too suddenly and with a heavy hand. I think I said already I swore to myself that I would not knock any branch of service until the wars were over. Some people join the Military because they truly hear the call, some because they are just that patriotic, some see it as a easy ride full of free lunches and other reasons I'm sure. It would be nice to sort these recruits who have different outlooks on service and reimburse them accordingly.

You speak with the tongue of a wise man, you choose your Avatar well.
 
...you really need someone to demonstrate to you that when you decommission entire units you lose careerists?

People can be transferred to other units CP, and I note you provided nothing to back up your claims, again.
 
Back
Top Bottom