|
Does this suck or what
Army Issues Order to Stop U.S. Soldiers from Leaving
Jun 2, 10:41 AM (ET) WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army has issued an order preventing thousands of soldiers designated for duty in Iraq or Afghanistan from leaving the military even when their volunteer service commitment expires, officials said on Wednesday. The move to extend the service of some soldiers involuntarily was the latest sign of increasing stress on the Army as the Pentagon strives to maintain adequate troop levels in the two conflicts. Lt. Gen. Franklin Hagenbeck, the Army's personnel chief, denied that the move was a sign of desperation for the Army, although he did acknowledge that the Army was "stretched." The Army issued so-called "stop loss" and "stop movement" orders for soldiers in all units that will deploy outside the United States to take part in future missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Army has previously issued such orders covering some troops in the two conflicts, but not as broadly as the latest move. Since the attacks on the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, some 45,000 soldiers have been affected by similar orders, Hagenbeck said. The "stop loss" order means that soldiers who otherwise could leave the service when their volunteer commitments expire, starting 90 days before being sent, will be compelled to remain to the end of their overseas deployment and up to another 90 days after they come home. A "stop movement" order blocks soldiers from shifting to new assignments during the restricted period. Army spokesmen were unable to give a figure for how many soldiers would be affected by the orders beyond saying it will be in the thousands. |
While unfortunate for those who want out, this is a known risk in the military- as is being killed, wounded, sent to god awful deserts to fight, etc etc. They also have the right to call you back(inactive reserves) for 2 years after your discharge.
Maybe if they scream and bitch and whine about the contract they knowingly entered into- like Michael Moore and his movie... maybe they will be let out? |
Originally posted by ironporer While unfortunate for those who want out, this is a known risk in the military- as is being killed, wounded, sent to god awful deserts to fight, etc etc. They also have the right to call you back(inactive reserves) for 2 years after your discharge. Maybe if they scream and bitch and whine about the contract they knowingly entered into- like Michael Moore and his movie... maybe they will be let out? |
Originally posted by Lothianlad Erm......a question.....is America really the "Land of the Free"? |
Originally posted by Lothianlad Erm......a question.....is America really the "Land of the Free"? |
It's quite a common thing you can't leave the British army in time of conflict otherwise everyone with half an ounce of common sense would leave.
You're also a reservist for a varing length of time after you demob and liable for recall. I don't see the problem it's part of joining the army it's what they do. If you don't like that prospect be a milkman. |
Originally posted by Lothianlad Erm......a question.....is America really the "Land of the Free"? I reckon we Brits probably have more freedom than Americans. We have the freedom to go on holiday to Cuba if we want but Americans don't. We also have the freedom to live and work in any EEC member state, but Americans don't. If we reside in the UK we have free healthcare regardless of income or savings and pre-existing conditions. Americans living in the US have to be pretty much on the poverty line to get free healthcare. I still don't really know what the average American means by the term 'Land of the Free'. I think that equally, the United Kingdom is the "Land of the Free" in modern times.:lecture: |
Originally posted by ironporer While unfortunate for those who want out, this is a known risk in the military- as is being killed, wounded, sent to god awful deserts to fight, etc etc. They also have the right to call you back(inactive reserves) for 2 years after your discharge. Maybe if they scream and bitch and whine about the contract they knowingly entered into- like Michael Moore and his movie... maybe they will be let out? |
Originally posted by Englishmum I reckon we Brits probably have more freedom than Americans. We have the freedom to go on holiday to Cuba if we want but Americans don't. We also have the freedom to live and work in any EEC member state, but Americans don't. If we reside in the UK we have free healthcare regardless of income or savings and pre-existing conditions. Americans living in the US have to be pretty much on the poverty line to get free healthcare. I still don't really know what the average American means by the term 'Land of the Free'. I think that equally, the United Kingdom is the "Land of the Free" in modern times.:lecture: Free things are not always the best. and dont come with much of a choice. i'd rather be able to pay for my healthcare than receive free healthcare. same applies to tuition fees, housing, transport, etc. that way i can make the best suited choice. the US is not part of the EU so you wouldnt expect americans to be live and work in the EU freely. just like brits cant just come and work here freely. what were you thinking writing that down? |
Originally posted by Gross50 Free things are not always the best. and dont come with much of a choice. i'd rather be able to pay for my healthcare than receive free healthcare. same applies to tuition fees, housing, transport, etc. that way i can make the best suited choice. the US is not part of the EU so you wouldnt expect americans to be live and work in the EU freely. just like brits cant just come and work here freely. what were you thinking writing that down? On healthcare, in the US you can only make the best choice if you've got the bank account to pay for it. Same goes for schools, housing and transport. Those who are not well paid, who do not have decent health insurance provided by their employer (a huge quantity of people), cannot make any choice at all. People call this the Land of the Free without thinking much about what that actually means. It is also called the land of opportunity, and there are certainly opportunities here to be had, but the opportunities are not equal for all because the starting line is not in the same place for all of us. It doesn't make much sense to pretend that someone who grows up in an inner-city housing project in Chicago is starting from the same place as someone who grew up in middle-class suburbia. |
Originally posted by Lion in Winter On healthcare, in the US you can only make the best choice if you've got the bank account to pay for it. Same goes for schools, housing and transport. Those who are not well paid, who do not have decent health insurance provided by their employer (a huge quantity of people), cannot make any choice at all. People call this the Land of the Free without thinking much about what that actually means. It is also called the land of opportunity, and there are certainly opportunities here to be had, but the opportunities are not equal for all because the starting line is not in the same place for all of us. It doesn't make much sense to pretend that someone who grows up in an inner-city housing project in Chicago is starting from the same place as someone who grew up in middle-class suburbia. As to health care the vast majority have decent coverage, and the vocal minority have minimal, none (many by their own choice to not participate), or medicaid...which is totally free. Our system is far from perfect, and many changes can and should be made, but in only a few cases is it as bad as some make it out to be. |
Originally posted by ironporer Not to quibble, but all things being as they are, why are there millions lined up to come here, including a huge number of Brits? As to health care the vast majority have decent coverage, and the vocal minority have minimal, none (many by their own choice to not participate), or medicaid...which is totally free. Our system is far from perfect, and many changes can and should be made, but in only a few cases is it as bad as some make it out to be. Well according to these doctors, there are some 43 million American citizens with no health insurance, not counting those with inadequate insurance. http://www.pnhp.org/ As to the Brits coming here, there are about 6 hundred and some thousand Brits in the US. That leaves about 59 million at home. They don't come for the health insurance. I'm self employed and work hard. I don't choose to be uninsured. The amount of coverage I can afford to buy as an individual doesn't begin to cover the costs of healthcare. To get something vaguely equivalent to what I would get if I had a decent job in a good-sized company I would have to fork over $500 - 700 a month. Where my husband works they offer him family membership in a plan that would still cost us $500.00 a month. Can't do it. Of course there are many good things about this country, but the insufficient public funding for healthcare is not one of them. Ditto education. Brits and Europeans in general pay much higher taxes than Americans and (when we are not paying for missiles to throw at Iraq) we use these taxes for things that are considered common goods. We all pay so that we all benefit, is the concept. The whole society benefits from decent universal health care and decent universal education. Here, the philosophy is much more individualistic. |
Originally posted by Lion in Winter I'm self employed and work hard. I don't choose to be uninsured. The amount of coverage I can afford to buy as an individual doesn't begin to cover the costs of healthcare. To get something vaguely equivalent to what I would get if I had a decent job in a good-sized company I would have to fork over $500 - 700 a month. Where my husband works they offer him family membership in a plan that would still cost us $500.00 a month. Can't do it. Of course there are many good things about this country, but the insufficient public funding for healthcare is not one of them. Ditto education. Brits and Europeans in general pay much higher taxes than Americans and (when we are not paying for missiles to throw at Iraq) we use these taxes for things that are considered common goods. We all pay so that we all benefit, is the concept. The whole society benefits from decent universal health care and decent universal education. Here, the philosophy is much more individualistic. |
Originally posted by Gross50 Free things are not always the best. and dont come with much of a choice. i'd rather be able to pay for my healthcare than receive free healthcare. same applies to tuition fees, housing, transport, etc. that way i can make the best suited choice. the US is not part of the EU so you wouldnt expect americans to be live and work in the EU freely. just like brits cant just come and work here freely. what were you thinking writing that down? I think the point about the EU is that Brits can choose to walk into 25 countries and live and work without much hassle. This is a massive freedom in my mind. Americans can only really live in their own nation...well I suppose Canada is an option but they are making this difficult to do since 911. Originally posted by Gross50 why dont you move to britain. free healthcare, dole money, free housing, subsidised education. and you wont have to work or pay taxes for all this and much more. |
Originally posted by Gross50 why dont you move to britain. free healthcare, dole money, free housing, subsidised education. and you wont have to work or pay taxes for all this and much more. I keep forgetting that if one says anything even remotely negative about this country one must leave at once. There is such as thing as criticising in order to make things better - a lot of native born red-blooded Americans have done it, down the years. |
Originally posted by jambo_2004 I think the point about the EU is that Brits can choose to walk into 25 countries and live and work without much hassle. This is a massive freedom in my mind. Americans can only really live in their own nation...well I suppose Canada is an option but they are making this difficult to do since 911. |
Originally posted by ironporer And here one can choose to live in any of 50 states in a geographical area similar in size to the EU with it's 25. |
Originally posted by jambo_2004 There's a vast difference from living in Rome and Paris than California and Texas. |
Originally posted by ironporer Not to quibble, but all things being as they are, why are there millions lined up to come here, including a huge number of Brits? As to health care the vast majority have decent coverage, and the vocal minority have minimal, none (many by their own choice to not participate), or medicaid...which is totally free. Our system is far from perfect, and many changes can and should be made, but in only a few cases is it as bad as some make it out to be. Sue |
Excuse me, but I get tired of people saying that health care in England is free. I remember HUGE chunks of NHS taxes coming out of my paycheck. :rolleyes:
|
yes - its paid for taxation so is not really free, BUT i get a similar amount coming out of my US paycheck for medicare but don't receive any benefit from it !!!
what bullshit is that? paying for something i don't/can't access??? |
Originally posted by ElsieTheMaid Excuse me, but I get tired of people saying that health care in England is free. |
Originally posted by BritGuyTN yes - its paid for taxation so is not really free, BUT i get a similar amount coming out of my US paycheck for medicare but don't receive any benefit from it !!! what bullshit is that? paying for something i don't/can't access??? |
Originally posted by ironporer Then don't look at the social security contribution you make every week then- as with medicare, you won't see anything from it 'till 65...and it's a hell of a lot more (plus the matching amount paid by your employer!). Of course if you die and have surviving children they would get SSI, or maybe you could be disabled.... |
Originally posted by jambo_2004 They didnt, they said health care in the UK. you must be Scottish or Welsh I suppose, with that chip on your shoulder about the countries terminology...get over it. UK/England who cares, we all knew what was meant |
Originally posted by Chopper-Chris you havin a laugh mate? you must be Scottish or Welsh I suppose, with that chip on your shoulder about the countries terminology...get over it. UK/England who cares, we all knew what was meant Well....being that I'm from England, I personalized it. Didn't mean to offend anyone :rolleyes: |
Originally posted by ElsieTheMaid Well....being that I'm from England, I personalized it. Didn't mean to offend anyone :rolleyes: :lecture: |
A lot of money?!?!
do you call $13k a year a lot of money? if you do then fair enough - if you don't then your're possibly confusing social security payments with a 401k 'If you have been working all your life contributing the maximum to the Social Security system, you could receive over $13,000 at your normal retirement age ($20,000 for a couple).' |
Originally posted by BritGuyTN A lot of money?!?! do you call $13k a year a lot of money? if you do then fair enough - if you don't then your're possibly confusing social security payments with a 401k 'If you have been working all your life contributing the maximum to the Social Security system, you could receive over $13,000 at your normal retirement age ($20,000 for a couple).' £78 per week less than £6000 per year. |
Originally posted by manc1976 isn't the UK? £78 per week less than £6000 per year. Just went to the US Social Security on line calculator that give projections. At today's rate if my husband retired at 62 he would get $1,500 per month, rising to $2,000 per month and around $2,500 per month at 70. Bit different to the UK. How anyone can survive on 78b quid a week is beyond me. |
Originally posted by Polaris_x On the subject of soldiers not being allowed to leave at the end of their EAOS, I think it's fair. I've served, and I'm well aware that when you VOLUNTEER (nobody twists your arm) to join the military, you're not joining a basket weaving community. You're joining a force that's main function is to kill, be killed, and generally be used as a pawn by politicians. In addition to that, the U.S. Constitution no longer applies to you. Instead, you're governed by the laws of the USMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). You are a tool. A piece of property. I learned this once, as I took it upon myself to get a nasty sunburn. After getting Captains Mass (a diciplinary thing), and having $500 removed from my pay on the charge of "defacing government property" (me), it was obvious what a soldier's/marine's/airman's/sailor's roll is. We are a fighting too. The "stop loss" measure is simply another tool that the government can, and will use. These people knew the roll and responsibility BEFORE going in. I hope they can see their family soon, but they are not going to get an ounce of sorrow because they think they didn't know the rules. On the subject of America being the land of the free, I have mixed feelings. We are free. We have the freedom to fail and to succeed. In other countries (like England), you don't have the freedom to fail. You know that good 'ole Mamma Government will let you suck titty if you fall, and you can always leach off the dole. You gave up your freedoms for security (gun rights). You gave up your freedom to travel (by allowing your government to tax you to death on fuel). Yes, you can travel to Cuba. Big deal. There's only about 2.5 million other destinations on my list ABOVE Cuba that I will never see anyway. As for the EEC member state comment, I find it funny. I can live anywhere from California to Maine, from Florida to Oregon, and even Alaska or Hawaii. You're splitting hairs here. I think the land mass between the two are relatively equal, and each state in the U.S. is similar, but have separate laws. I really think dubya f--cked up big time by starting this war. We were not in fear of losing our freedom to anyone, we were not being invaded, at least not the last time I looked out my window. This war is a joke. Just take a look at Chalabi. What does that tell you about this presidents' intentions. He wanted to put him in as president of Iraq. This a man who has lived in the USA since 1952 and has been indicted for bank fraud in Jordan, he is also a close friend of Rummy and Wolfie, is that democratic? Now they are saying on tv that if he sets foot on US soil he will be arrested. As for being able to get the dole in UK, well you have the same system here in the US. I was laid off from work and am collecting dole. Damned right I am claiming it, I paid for it. Also the claim that giving up security and freedom by giving up gun rights is just plain stupid. I think that is the kind of freedom most Brits can live with. No fear of some nutter drunk on a Saturday nite blowing you away for some frivolous reason. I guess you have never travelled through Europe judging by your comparison to living anywhere in the US as opposed to living anywhere in Europe. Europe is vastly different from country to country, in my opinion (and I have travelled to almost every State), the US states are all pretty much alike except for the weather. The fact that all the States have different laws has alwayse seemed assinine to me, it is the same country, shouldn't each State have the same laws? Rant over |
Originally posted by jambo_2004 This is a massive freedom in my mind. Americans can only really live in their own nation... |
Originally posted by cathy22w To many Americans, there IS only one nation. Patriotism is so great here that many would not dream of holidaying anywhere else, let alone live or work. |
Originally posted by Polaris_x You gave up your freedoms for security (gun rights). |
Originally posted by Thydney I agree with most of what you say but in the UK no one has or ever had the right to bear arms and as such we can't have given them away. Yes we have strict gun laws but we also have less murders than the US even on a pro rata basis. |
Originally posted by Chopper-Chris you havin a laugh mate? you must be Scottish or Welsh I suppose, with that chip on your shoulder about the countries terminology...get over it. UK/England who cares, we all knew what was meant The discussion was about the UK and not just England, it has bugger all to do with terminology, just simple observation before posting comments...it's a easy enough concept to master. Now piss off budgie :D |
Originally posted by jambo_2004 Freedom of choice is a good thing. However I think freedom from the worry that you might die if you catch a treatable disease is something Brits also benefit from. I think the point about the EU is that Brits can choose to walk into 25 countries and live and work without much hassle. This is a massive freedom in my mind. Americans can only really live in their own nation...well I suppose Canada is an option but they are making this difficult to do since 911. It's a welfare state, i.e it cares whether it's poorer citizens live or die. Yes some people abuse the system to no ends but I beleive Blair and co are dealing with this. It's true, no-one dies from lack of medical insurance cover here. I heard on the radio an American lady trourist who was heavily pregnant collapsed in Oxford Street, London, and taken to hospital where she was delivered of her baby and received such excellent treatment, at no cost whatsover to her self, that she has written a book about that experience. She had nothing but praise for the doctors and nurses at that London hospital. Her book was reviewed on BBC Radio Five Live but I can't remember it's title or the name of the American lady author concerned. Cheers :) |
Originally posted by ElsieTheMaid Well....being that I'm from England, I personalized it. Didn't mean to offend anyone :rolleyes: |
Originally posted by Thydney I agree with most of what you say but in the UK no one has or ever had the right to bear arms and as such we can't have given them away. Yes we have strict gun laws but we also have less murders than the US even on a pro rata basis. ...Controls, nonetheless, began in 1903, with the Pistols Act, which required the production of a Game or Gun Licence before buying certain kinds of pistol. In the absence of any crime wave, supporters of the Bill were reduced to giving anecdotal evidence of shooting incidents involving children.[19] But it was not seen as controversial, and had an easy passage. Next came the Firearms Act of 1920. Still, the use of guns in crime was almost insignificant: between 1911 and 1917, there were 170 instance in London, or an annual average of 24.[20] But, with civil war in Ireland, fears in England of a Bolshevistt coup, and the prospect of millions of demobilised weapons coming onto the home market, it was agreed that something ought to be done. Precedent sanctioned temporary measures. The Government chose permanent ones; and its Act was substantially the modern scheme of control. (snipped from : http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache...gland+uk&hl=en) |
Originally posted by effi Just take a look at Chalabi. What does that tell you about this presidents' intentions. He wanted to put him in as president of Iraq. This a man who has lived in the USA since 1952 and has been indicted for bank fraud in Jordan, he is also a close friend of Rummy and Wolfie, is that democratic? Now they are saying on tv that if he sets foot on US soil he will be arrested. actually, Chalabi lived in London: "...Chalabi, 59, is a Savile Row Shiite who has spent much more time in London than in Baghdad. His career as a banker has been a trail of lawsuits and investigations (and one conviction for fraud, in absentia by a military court, in Jordan; Chalabi says he was framed by Saddam Hussein)...." (snipped from: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5040831/) |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 2:09 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.