[angaq0k]

I just found this about some American soldiers going AWOL because they are disagreeing with the war in Iraq.

The site has texts as well as RealAudio documents following AWOL American soldiers.

Interesting and touching as well...

http://www.cbc.ca/disclosure/archives/040120.html#army

"At seventeen, too young to buy a beer, too old to die..."

Edit: The AV extract of the report explains how extremely difficult it is for those soldiers to get refugee status as well.

[Zimphire]

And they will be tried for it as well.

Sucks to be them.

[zachs]

Some of the sharpest criticism is from unexpected quarters: soldiers in the American army who say this just isn’t what they signed up for.

While I don't support the war, I just am wondering: what exactly did they sign up for? Obviously there was a risk that a situation might arise where they would have to fight in a war/conflict.

Nonetheless, I do hope that those who are there are able to leave as soon as possible.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by zachs:
While I don't support the war, I just am wondering: what exactly did they sign up for? Obviously there was a risk that a situation might arise where they would have to fight in a war/conflict.

Nonetheless, I do hope that those who are there are able to leave as soon as possible.

Here is a clue: check the game and the marketing.

The real-audio reports are very interesting...

"... they're are the Mall, let's get them hanging at the Mall!"

[quandarry]

wasn't bush awol from the air national guard for eight months?

i guess if the prez can do it why not the grunts.

well maybe because his family was rich and well connected.

ok...thanks for the answer.

[zachs]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
Here is a clue: check the game and the marketing.

The real-audio reports are very interesting...

Also, the suicide rates are up among soldiers in Iraq...

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by zachs:
Also, the suicide rates are up among soldiers in Iraq...

And they may be among the youngest ones... Wish we could have more data on this...

Usually, the young people are the most inclined to attempt suicide, mostly because they often do not have enough life experience.

I feel very sorry for some of them because of what they will see and go through. Although they are often prepared psychologically before going in combat, those preps are not a guarantee of psychological survival for a minority of them. But everyone will be affected. It is just not "any other job"...

[quandarry]

what in the heck were they thinking?

did they think they were joining the 'boy scouts of america'!

http://www.mac-bsa.org/

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by quandarry:
what in the heck were they thinking?

did they think they were joining the 'boy scouts of america'!

http://www.mac-bsa.org/

In the U.S., there are incentives for anyone going in the Army, especially regarding school tuition and job placement afterwards. When you have a low income, and you are ambitious, the Army seems like one good way to go.

Especially and your in peace time.

But if you check the video documents, you will understand better, probably. There is a scene where a Marine vet confronts, in a classroom, a Navy recruiter.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by zachs:
While I don't support the war, I just am wondering: what exactly did they sign up for? Obviously there was a risk that a situation might arise where they would have to fight in a war/conflict.

Because the military has pretty much replaced financial aid in the US today.

The only major where you have a remote chance on getting some aid is Education... there quite a few organizations willing to fund for more teachers.

Way back when college used to be somewhat affordable, and there were scholarships.

Now even ones for minorities are a fraction of what's need.

$1000 scholarship doesn't even pay for all the books for some majors/colleges. Forget about tuition. That's almost a joke these days.

The other problem is insurance. You get more benefits if you enlist. It used to be if your parents have health insurance, as long as your in school, your covered. Now many got rid of that rule, and end it at 18 for children. School issued insurance is pretty crummy (to put it nicely).

So if you can't afford college/insurance... it's normally a great deal. What other choice is there? The second best life choice is sadly walmart.

College is getting more and more expensive (and required for more and more jobs). And as medical becomes more expensive, it's becoming harder and harder to survive without insurance.

What's a boy to do?


I'm thankful my father's health insurance covers me as long as I'm a full time student.... A interesting note is that if I run a credit or two behind. It's cheaper for me to take 4 extra BS classes and have a full semester, making me a full time student... than to take 1 class. The difference is actually over $1,000 to get the same health insurance.

I know actually 2 people who are in that boat (one told me just the other day). Taking 4 classes just to be a full time student, and have health insurance.

Then you have the wonderful job market making it easy to get a job after college.

No matter how many times I'm told the job market is excellent... I'm still finding many looking for jobs who think it's terrible. And some statistics that show that.

[angaq0k]

Got to be rich to become rich.

[Mister Elf]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
And they will be tried for it as well.

Sucks to be them.

What are you talking about. The military is completely volunteer. I don't care if they just wanted college money or something, they joined knowing they might have to fight. No one in the government made them do it. They deserve to rot in Leavenworth.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
And they will be tried for it as well.

Sucks to be them.

If they're willing to accept those consequences, then more power to them; accepting the consequences for committing the crime is what civil disobedience is all about: it's about showing that something is important enough that you will accept whatever society might inflict. Shame that most protesters these days don't realize that.

[SimeyTheLimey]

People go AWOL from miiitary units all the time. I remember at least two in the units I served in, and that was peacetime. Some people simply can't hack the discipline.

What these people are allegedly doing, however, isn't going AWOL. It's desertion. That's a serious, serious, felony. I hope these people think it is worthwhile because they just decided to ruin their lives.

[Mister Elf]

Ah, but they will not be charged with desertion. They would be charged with desertion IN A TIME OF WAR, which can carry the death penalty. Deserters are stupid.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by Mister Elf:
Ah, but they will not be charged with desertion. They would be charged with desertion IN A TIME OF WAR, which can carry the death penalty. Deserters are stupid.

Except you are not at times of war, since you are fighting criminals. You are not fighting a country. You are looking for murderers.

As you probably noticed no nation as claimed responsability. Only one man did.

So you are at fighting against a criminal, and his murderous associates.

[Spliffdaddy]

hey, whatever.

as long as we're killing some terrorists every now and again.

we could, I suppose, sit on our asses and move our lips - but those positions look to be filled.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by Millennium:
If they're willing to accept those consequences, then more power to them; accepting the consequences for committing the crime is what civil disobedience is all about: it's about showing that something is important enough that you will accept whatever society might inflict. Shame that most protesters these days don't realize that.

Ditto, their decision, their belief and their consequences.

[Mister Elf]

Anti-drug ops in the military are called "The war on drugs".

Why wouldn't Iraq be a war. All I ever hear is, "Bush sucks because he started a WAR without proper approval."

[Secret__Police]

These cowards should be taken to their home towns and shot in the public square.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by Secret__Police:
These cowards should be taken to their home towns and shot in the public square.

How patriotic.. to take good care of your own like that...

So....

After the shooting...

I guess you will join your unit in Iraq...

Right?

From this site: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Central/0....ap/index.html

Chief Warrant Officer William Howell was following his wife around the front yard with a handgun when officers arrived Sunday night in response to a 911 call from the woman. When police officers ordered him to drop his weapon, Howell shot himself, authorities said.

A police officer also fired, hitting Howell in the right arm, Monument police Sgt. Richard Tudor said. An autopsy showed Howell was killed by his own bullet.

Howell's wife was treated for a head injury. Three children inside the home were not hurt.

The El Paso County Sheriff's Department and the Army are investigating Howell's death, and the district attorney's office is investigating whether the officer was justified in shooting Howell.

Howell, 36, was a Green Beret assigned to Fort Carson, near Colorado Springs.

The military requires troops returning from combat to be screened for post-traumatic stress disorder and other problems. The policy was enacted after four military wives of special forces soldiers returning from Afghanistan were killed by their husbands at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, in 2002.

Steve Robinson, executive director of the National Gulf War Resource Center, an advocacy group for veterans of both conflicts, said at least 23 service members committed suicide in Iraq since the war started and six, excluding Howell, killed themselves after returning stateside.

No further comments.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
Except you are not at times of war, since you are fighting criminals. You are not fighting a country. You are looking for murderers.

As you probably noticed no nation as claimed responsability. Only one man did.

So you are at fighting against a criminal, and his murderous associates.

Just looking through old threads when I noticed this. There is precedent for war against a criminal group. Look up Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates.

The war against the Barbary Pirates even made it into the Marine Corps hymn.

"From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli..."

Anyway, back to the topic of this deserter, he is scheduled for court martial.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/03/27/cou...ial/index.html

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
Just looking through old threads when I noticed this. There is precedent for war against a criminal group. Look up Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates.

The war against the Barbary Pirates even made it into the Marine Corps hymn.

"From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli..."

Anyway, back to the topic of this deserter, he is scheduled for court martial.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/03/27/cou...ial/index.html

Good point ThinkInsane: again, I am learning something new!

I want to make certain that what I have been trying to point out is that, from tht report mentionned above, the U.S. Army brings incentive, but the recruiting may be going overboard with promises that may not suit all.

I do not know about Canada (I am Canadian), although their publicity is hinting at the adventurous aspect of it (and also a hint of peacekeeping).

What I find to be the sadest thing is that we send people to war, and because they want to avoid it, we make them pay a high price. What I find untolerable is that there are people who will never go to war, but will do everything to send men and women do the dirty work for them, and give them crap for not respecting their engagement.

These people die for our safety; I respect that. There is no way in Hell we should treat them as criminal if they do not want to get killed for some bozos who have no intention, although they have the capability, to do the fight on their own...

And there after there is that other price to pay. Post Trauma Syndrome Disorder. Having to live with thoughts of killing people under orders.

As Robert MacNamara said: "How much Evil does it take to do good?"

I think before we should put the pressure on soldiers, we should look at our responsabilities and make ourselves accountable for our actions. Otherwise, the treatment we give our soldiers is nothing but abuse.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by angaq0k:

What I find to be the sadest thing is that we send people to war, and because they want to avoid it, we make them pay a high price.

You do realize that they volunteered for this? Nobody made them join the armed forces.
The armed forces is not a democracy. You do what you are told, and they realize this
going in.

Again. NOBODY was made to go. They volunteered. There is a big difference from what
you are trying to say.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
You do realize that they volunteered for this? Nobody made them join the armed forces.
The armed forces is not a democracy. You do what you are told, and they realize this
going in.

Again. NOBODY was made to go. They volunteered. There is a big difference from what
you are trying to say.

They volunteered conditional to an incentive which may cost their lives.

I am not saying they made an intelligent decision: but I believe that as far as fighting for others, they deserve our respect.

And if they volunteered to enroll, they should be allowed to leave. Which is a world of difference compared to people who complain about their soldiers for being cowards, especially when they complain from their living rooms...

And I really wonder how a democracy can tolerate totalitarism in its own ranks; give a coherent answer on that.

You won't.

[Spliffdaddy]

Yep.

There are folks that love America more than life itself.

What would you be willing to die for?

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Yep.

There are folks that love America more than life itself.

I wonder why...

After all, don't they deserve that American life for themselves?

[Spliffdaddy]

You wonder why they risk their lives for America?

You must not be American.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
You wonder why they risk their lives for America?

You must not be American.

You're right.

How about yourself?

[Spliffdaddy]

I don't wonder why. I know the answer.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
They volunteered conditional to an incentive which may cost their lives.

I am not saying they made an intelligent decision: but I believe that as far as fighting for others, they deserve our respect.

And if they volunteered to enroll, they should be allowed to leave. Which is a world of difference compared to people who complain about their soldiers for being cowards, especially when they complain from their living rooms...

And I really wonder how a democracy can tolerate totalitarism in its own ranks; give a coherent answer on that.

You won't.

Now don't take this personally, but are you retarded? I would be able to better understand
your statements here if you were, but I will endeavor to pretend you just don't get it.

When you join "VOLUNTEER" for the Armed forces of the USA, you aren't joining a club that you can just leave at will. You take an OATH, and are given opportunity to leave at a good time before you are deployed. It's called BOOT CAMP. When you join and commit yourself and accept any benefits such as pay, money for school etc., then you are bound by that "oath" and contract with the USA armed service you chose.

The Armed Forces in the USA are NOT a democracy, it is quite different and for good reason. When you join, you must take orders. If you cannot take orders then some of the people who are next to you can DIE. When some idiot goes AWOL then people can die because he isn't where he should be doing his JOB.

Do you understand the words that I have just typed?
Was that "Coherant" enough for you?

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
Now don't take this personally, but are you retarded? I would be able to better understand your statements here if you were, but I will endeavor to pretend you just don't get it.
(...)
Do you understand the words that I have just typed?
Was that "Coherant" enough for you?

I love that name calling thing. You won't mind if I reciprocate at a time I feel appropriate?

I think you should endeavour that I am simply stating an opinion, and I have a right to do so. You may not agree, that is allowed, but that does not authorize you to insult me.

My understanding is that once you join an Army Corps, whatever the Nation it is part of, once you get in, you cannot leave until the end of your contract with that Corps.

And I also understand the weight on the shoulders of recruits is quite heavy. You lose a lot if you do not make it through the boot camp. People will be put to shame and become the object of a lot of bullying back at home. But soldiers are supposed to be tough, right? And they're made to be tough; you have to if you are to kill some people.

And you are not supposed to think about why; it is told for you. People think for you the reasons why you go kill people. So you have to trust whoever made that decision. Actually, it is "trusted" into you. It is called indoctrination.

But what if people do not have that same confidence anymore? What if there are reasons (right or wrong) to raise doubt about the motivation for killing specific people?

Would you want to be associated with an action motivated by something other that the Truth trusted into you?

And how come an Army as to create so many incentives to grow its ranks? Who is going to enrol? Did they have a choice? Of course in a democracy people have a choice but the limitations of these choices does not create more freedom. Sometimes, it is even better to limit choices, especially if you have objectives to meet.

Of course in the Army you have to take orders. But is that necessary to achieve your goals? I am not so sure.

And then, one may wonder if there is such a need for an Army Corps in the first place. I mean, of course we have to defend our countries. But what are we to defend them from exactly? What is the real need for an Army?

And can this reasoning be applied to other nations as well?

Again, it is easy for the guy watching TV and to tell soldiers to kill.

Army officials disclosed some of the suicide findings on Wednesday, including a suicide rate of 17.3 per 100,000 soldiers among soldiers in Iraq, much higher than the overall Army rate.
Crow said this compared to a rate of 15.6 per 100,000 during the Vietnam War and 3.6 during the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites).
The report also detailed low morale among Army soldiers, with 72 percent of those questioned characterizing morale as either low or very low in their unit and 52 percent saying their personal morale was either low or very low.
Combat stress was caused by seeing dead bodies, personally coming under attack or knowing someone who was killed or seriously wounded, the report said. Other factors included soldiers' uncertainty over when they would go home.
The report found that soldiers who showed signs of depression, anxiety or traumatic stress were more likely to say it was too difficult to get help from the Army .

from: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...&printer=1

[Spliffdaddy]

omg, you're right.

we should eliminate our military right this minute.

What an utterly stupid thing we've been doing all this time.

[phoenixboy]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
You do realize that they volunteered for this?

for many who "choose" to enrole, financial incentives weigh in heavily. the govt. should provide "social services" with the same financial incentives.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
omg, you're right.

we should eliminate our military right this minute.

What an utterly stupid thing we've been doing all this time.

It just goes to show what a idealistic world they think we live in.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by phoenixboy:
for many who "choose" to enrole, financial incentives weigh in heavily. the govt. should provide "social services" with the same financial incentives.

Fascinating.

The word is enlist, not enrole. This isn't school, it is the Armed Forces, and one does not just drop out when they find they cannot do their job. There are proper channels and necessary rules to abide by, especially during wartime. Do a little research on the subject before spouting off such thoughtless satire.

The government should provide "social services" with the same financial incentives?
It's called FAFSA. Look it up. You have to pay it back though.

There are many loans available for education, but there are signing bonuses, and good pay in the Armed Services. The hitch is, you will have to follow orders, and when necessary, kill people who are trying to kill you.

Got it?

[phoenixboy]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
The government should provide "social services" with the same financial incentives?
It's called FAFSA. Look it up. You have to pay it back though.

do you have to pay back the financial bonuses you get by enlisting and "serving"? no? didn't think so.

i agree, in as far as that people who join the army should abide by the rules. but everybody should have the same "opportunity" to decline the "offer". directly or indirectly.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by phoenixboy:
do you have to pay back the financial bonuses you get by enlisting and "serving"? no? didn't think so.

These guys will if they are convicted. Every dime.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by phoenixboy:
do you have to pay back the financial bonuses you get by enlisting and "serving"? no? didn't think so.

i agree, in as far as that people who join the army should abide by the rules. but everybody should have the same "opportunity" to decline the "offer". directly or indirectly.

Everyone does have the op to decline. It's just before your raise your right hand and swear the OATH. Duh.

[phoenixboy]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
Everyone does have the op to decline. It's just before your raise your right hand and swear the OATH. Duh.

that was hardly the point. *duh*

i don't see a lot of upper and upper-middle class people "choosing to enlist". i wonder why...

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by phoenixboy:
that was hardly the point. *duh*

i don't see a lot of upper and upper-middle class people "choosing to enlist". i wonder why...

You don't see a whole lot of poor people enlisting either. From experience, it's mostly the middle class, upper middle class, or upper working classes.

You seem to have an idea in your head that people join the military mostly out of financial desperation. It's true that the benefits are a part of the reason, maybe even an important part. But there are many other parts as well -- the adventure, patriotism, family traditions, the desire to do something meaningful, or to prove something to yourself. For most of us who enlisted, its a combination of all the above. Very few would give up 4 years of their life just to go to college. It's far too easy to get financial aid in this county, and most other methods don't require nearly as much from you.

Didn't you tell me you live in Mannheim? Maybe instead of spouting stereotypes you should go talk to some of those soldiers that live in your town. I think you will find out that they had a variety of reasons for enlisting and that they place several values significantly above the financial benefits from service. because of those values, I think you would find that enlistees are very unsympathetic to these deserters.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
You seem to have an idea in your head that people join the military mostly out of financial desperation. It's true that the benefits are a part of the reason, maybe even an important part. But there are many other parts as well -- the adventure, patriotism, family traditions, the desire to do something meaningful, or to prove something to yourself. For most of us who enlisted, its a combination of all the above. Very few would give up 4 years of their life just to go to college. It's far too easy to get financial aid in this county, and most other methods don't require nearly as much from you.

From this site: http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunhera...on/7654472.htm

The Army is offering up to $10,000 in tax-free bonuses for re-enlistment by active duty personnel deployed or about to be deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kuwait.

At the same time, the Army has issued "stop-loss" and "stop-move" orders that will affect a total of about 7,000 U.S. soldiers who otherwise would leave the military or transfer to other units.

Under the stop orders, they will be required to remain in their current Army postings even if they've met their contractual service obligations, are scheduled for retirement or have transfers approved, Lt. Col. Frank Childress, the Army's personnel spokesman at the Pentagon, said Tuesday.

Childress said the primary motive for the measures is to keep experienced units intact in the troubled regions in order to maintain their effectiveness.

But critics and military analysts said another motive is to keep men and women in military service at a time when the nation's all-volunteer fighting force is stretched thin because of too few soldiers and too many global commitments.

"There are two sides to the argument and there is not one right answer," said Harlan Ullman, a senior military adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington D.C. "They need experienced people but there is also the problem with all the people who want to get out."

Sounds like money is not so much of an incentive to return in Iraq...

But there is this one:http://sask.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/...cruits20030109 which surprised me.

Uncle Sam wants First Nations recruits

PRINCE ALBERT _ - The United States Army is recruiting First Nations from Canada and offering big incentives for Aboriginal people to serve Uncle Sam.

Bruce Monroe and Duncan Bird are telling students what it's like to be a soldier for a foreign country. Privates Monroe and Bird are from Saskatchewan and they served in the U.S. Army because United States views all status treaty Indians as North American, even if they live within Canadian borders. The treaties signed with the British Crown guarantee dual citizenship as part of the agreement to all indians under that treaty.

Staff Sergeant Dallas Cochran is a U.S. Army recruiter from Great Falls, Montana. He doesn't see any problem with recruiting First Nations who live in Canada for the United States Army.

"They're considered dual citizens. We take them into the army just like any citizen here in the United States," he says.

Munroe considered joining the Canadian Army, but the U.S. offered him a $20,000 signing bonus and another perk...

"They gave me $28,800 to continue my education after I get out of the army. When I'm in the army, they will be paying for whatever kind of schooling I desire," he says.

Duncan Bird says their are more opportunities in the U.S. Army.

"I wanted to use more high-tech equipment and I wanted to be trained better in a high-speed enviroment. Not saying that Canada isn't high speed, they're just a little behind the times when it comes to military warfare," says Bird.

Munroe is back in his old classroom on his latest mission — hometown recruiting. He tells these students that if they qualify, they could also find a career in the U.S. Army.

"I'm trying to interest people in the army, tell them what I've been through, tell them how the army is, what I've seen and the benefits the army can provide," says Munroe.

A spokesperson for the Canadian Armed Forces says it isn't worried that Aboriginal soldiers may flock to the United States, saying that The Canadian military is doing a good job of recruiting Aboriginal soldiers to serve for Canada.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
From this site: http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunhera...on/7654472.htm

$10,000 is historically not that high a reenlistment bonus. They have run up to $60,000 (depending on MOS). As for Canada, AFAIK, the Canadian armed forces pay considerably more than the US armed forces.

You do realize, by the way, that most journalists don't know the first thing about military life? For the most part, they didn't serve, so their writing on the subject is usually bad to hopelessly bad. You best sources are either the Stars and Stripes, which is a paper for servicemembers outside the Continental US, or the independent service papers like the Army Times, Air Force Times and Navy Times. Those are the sources the servicemembers themselves go to, not some ignorant civilian paper.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
$10,000 is historically not that high a reenlistment bonus. They have run up to $60,000 (depending on MOS). As for Canada, AFAIK, the Canadian armed forces pay considerably more than the US armed forces.

I have not seen numbers so I cannot tell.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
I have not seen numbers so I cannot tell.

So why did you post something that you basically know you don't understand?

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
So why did you post something that you basically know you don't understand?

Hold on.

I meant about the differences of wages between Canadian and American Army.

But I thought my quotes were accurate.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
Hold on.

I meant about the differences of wages between Canadian and American Army.

But I thought my quotes were accurate.

Oh. You are Canadian? Do you guys even have an army? If so, what do they do to keep busy?

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
Oh. You are Canadian? Do you guys even have an army? If so, what do they do to keep busy?

They avoid the bombs you drop on them when in duty in Afghanistan.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
Hold on.

I meant about the differences of wages between Canadian and American Army.

But I thought my quotes were accurate.

My information on the difference in wages between the Canadian and US armed forces dates from when I was in the US Army ten years ago. It might not be accurate now, since apparently Canada has cut its armed forces to the point where NATO is demanding more: Link

The Canadian defence budget was cut by about a quarter in the last decade and manpower fell by a third.

As I recall, Canada now has the second lowest defense spending in all of NATO. The only country that spends less as a percentage of GDP is Iceland. Rather than blaming the US, maybe Canada should look to itself?

Back to the topic at hand, your sources aren't useful for the reason I gave. If you want to learn about how the US military servicemembers view their compensation, the links I gave you are the place to look.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
You do realize, by the way, that most journalists don't know the first thing about military life? For the most part, they didn't serve, so their writing on the subject is usually bad to hopelessly bad. You best sources are either the Stars and Stripes, which is a paper for servicemembers outside the Continental US, or the independent service papers like the Army Times, Air Force Times and Navy Times. Those are the sources the servicemembers themselves go to, not some ignorant civilian paper.

You do realize, by the way, that all you brought so far lacks in consistance i.e. quotes to counter argue...

You may blame me on my ignorance but certainly not on arguing without documentation.