Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ctt1wbw · Jul 13, 2009, 06:23 AM

You want to talk about reducing the size of the military? Enforce a no smoking ban. I can't wait for the fallout over this one.

CNN

richwig83 · Jul 13, 2009, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw

You want to talk about reducing the size of the military? Enforce a no smoking ban. I can't wait for the fallout over this one.

CNN

Isnt that a double negative?

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 09:09 AM

Nanny state, part 342,452.

It's not gonna end here. Obama is gonna dictate every last detail of our lives.

-t

Laminar · Jul 13, 2009, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by richwig83

Isnt that a double negative?

You're not allowed to not smoke.

nonhuman · Jul 13, 2009, 10:28 AM

Smoking ban for the military makes sense and is not a violation of rights.

It's in the best interest of the military that our soldiers be in as good physical condition as possible. Smoking is detrimental to one's physical condition (regardless of cancer, it wreaks havoc with your lungs). Therefore, it is in the military's best interest that soldiers (and sailors and airmen) not smoke.

It is not a violation of rights because military service is voluntary. If you don't want to give up your smoking habit, don't join the military.

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Smoking ban for the military makes sense and is not a violation of rights.

It's in the best interest of the military that our soldiers be in as good physical condition as possible. Smoking is detrimental to one's physical condition (regardless of cancer, it wreaks havoc with your lungs). Therefore, it is in the military's best interest that soldiers (and sailors and airmen) not smoke.

It is not a violation of rights because military service is voluntary. If you don't want to give up your smoking habit, don't join the military.

I think we need to find MORE creative way to discourage people from serving in the military.

Low pay, public ridicule, underfunded VA etc. is not enough.
We need to make it so unattractive that only the people with no other choices go and serve.

==>

<==

-t

nonhuman · Jul 13, 2009, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by turtle777

I think we need to find MORE creative way to discourage people from serving in the military.

Low pay, public ridicule, underfunded VA etc. is not enough.
We need to make it so unattractive that only the people with no other choices go and serve.

==>

<==

-t

What is your motivation for joining the military? Either it's because you love your country and are willing to make sacrifices (perhaps the ultimate sacrifice) to defend her, or it's because you have no other option. In the first case, not smoking is a minor sacrifice that it many regards will actually improve your life, and in the second case you don't have any other option so it doesn't matter.

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

What is your motivation for joining the military? Either it's because you love your country and are willing to make sacrifices (perhaps the ultimate sacrifice) to defend her, or it's because you have no other option. In the first case, not smoking is a minor sacrifice that it many regards will actually improve your life, and in the second case you don't have any other option so it doesn't matter.

Someone who decides to give years of his live in service for his country should NOT be punished by puny rules and measly pay and benefits.

It's real simple: the less attractive military service is, the fewer people are willing to make the sacrifice.
Hence, you are left with people that have no other choice.

I, for one, want the military to be a good representation of our society, not just do bottom fishing.

-t

ghporter · Jul 13, 2009, 11:08 AM

Considering that the majority of smokers that I knew in the service actually started smoking in Basic Training, I think an outright ban isn't a bad idea. As a non-smoker, I've had to put up with everything from a smoke-filled break room in my workplace (which seriously impacted my ability to use the place) through billeting without ANY non-smoking rooms to one NCO club that was "all smoking, all the time." Smoking was NEVER a real function of any of these settings, and impaired MY ability to get my job done or take advantage of some of the "benefits" of service.

There is ample evidence that smoking costs whomever is providing the health care for the smoker. Hugely. Our military is also a VERY small group of people now, without the excess manpower to be able to put someone new into a job when the smoker gets sick. Today's military life is far more strenuous than when I was in, and that level of activity is hard to keep up with as a smoker. I've seen this in practice. The Air Force bans enlistees from smoking for at least 10 weeks-through Basic and tech school. If you've managed to not smoke for almost three months, what's the reason for starting again after that, anyway?

While our society is much better at this than it once was, I am still assaulted by other people's addiction to cigarettes in public places. I had to put up with WAY more of that crap when I enlisted, and while it gradually got better and better, it is STILL a major pain to try to get into facilities like Exchanges and clinics without having to get through a gantlet of smokers hanging out just outside the door. Making DoD facilities completely smoke free is a good way to both save taxpayer dollars on health care AND make our forces more robust and mission capable.

Laminar · Jul 13, 2009, 11:09 AM

I'd be curious about whether or not the Olympic team has an official smoking ban.

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 11:10 AM

Heck, the White House is not smoke free. How about the government starts to take their own medicine...

-t

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 01:36 PM

Time for these babies

-t

SpaceMonkey · Jul 13, 2009, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Nanny state, part 342,452.

It's not gonna end here. Obama is gonna dictate every last detail of our lives.

-t

The study originated in the Pentagon, and not the White House.

ort888 · Jul 13, 2009, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Nanny state, part 342,452.

It's not gonna end here. Obama is gonna dictate every last detail of our lives.

-t

Except that Obama has nothing to do with it. It was a study by the military themselves. And we all know what a hotbed of liberalism the military is... and, uh...

And for the record I think this is dumb. Let them smoke if they want to smoke. Put limits on where they can smoke to protect the interests of those who choose not to smoke, but leave the soldiers alone.

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

Except that Obama has nothing to do with it.

Let's hope it stays that way

-t

andi*pandi · Jul 13, 2009, 02:47 PM

Maybe a compromise is to make the cigs sold on base just as expensive as elsewhere. A deterrent, but not a ban.

ort888 · Jul 13, 2009, 02:51 PM

Maybe they could have special programs for soldiers who want to quit and offer incentives for them to join. I dunno.

I agree that smoking is bad and soldiers smoking probably makes them (marginally) less combat effective, so maybe something does need to be done. Something. Not a ban.

Isn't alcohol banned already? I was under the impression that soldiers in Iraq don't have access to booze and are not allowed to drink. Is this true?

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

Maybe they could have special programs for soldiers who want to quit and offer incentives for them to join. I dunno.

I agree that smoking is bad and soldiers smoking probably makes them (marginally) less combat effective, so maybe something does need to be done. Something. Not a ban.

Isn't alcohol banned already? I was under the impression that soldiers in Iraq don't have access to booze and are not allowed to drink. Is this true?

Yes, AFAIK, alcohol is banned.

Question is: what's next ? Coffee ? Chewing gum ?

-t

ShortcutToMoncton · Jul 13, 2009, 03:39 PM

Well that's a silly question. Neither coffee nor chewing gum impacts one's physical performance, health costs, and/or the health of people around you AFAIK.

Having said that, the no-alcohol ban sounds like pure hell to me.

greg

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

Well that's a silly question. Neither coffee nor chewing gum impacts one's physical performance, health costs, and/or the health of people around you AFAIK.

Coffee is addictive, and chewing gum bad for the environment,

Enough reasons for it to be banned.

-t

Laminar · Jul 13, 2009, 03:47 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Coffee is addictive, and chewing gum bad for the environment,

Enough reasons for it to be banned.

-t

Yes, and both of those are definitely on the same scale as cigarettes.

Dakar V · Jul 13, 2009, 03:48 PM

The grapes... so sour.

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Laminar

Yes, and both of those are definitely on the same scale as cigarettes.

I think we should also ban playboy for its adverse effects on eye sight...

-t

ort888 · Jul 13, 2009, 03:56 PM

We should ban guns from the military too because they are also dangerous.

ctt1wbw · Jul 13, 2009, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

The study originated in the Pentagon, and not the White House.

Well, the President IS the Commander In Chief of the US Armed Forces. So basically they are like two peas in a pod.

Dakar V · Jul 13, 2009, 04:03 PM

...so what you're saying is you're going to blame him anyway, even though it was the Pentagon and the Department of Veterans Affairs that commissioned the study.

Laminar · Jul 13, 2009, 04:15 PM

ctt1whatever just doesn't like Obama because he's black.

OldManMac · Jul 13, 2009, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw

Well, the President IS the Commander In Chief of the US Armed Forces. So basically they are like two peas in a pod.

Have to at least give you credit for being creative at grasping at straws.

OldManMac · Jul 13, 2009, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Someone who decides to give years of his live in service for his country should NOT be punished by puny rules and measly pay and benefits.

It's real simple: the less attractive military service is, the fewer people are willing to make the sacrifice.
Hence, you are left with people that have no other choice.

I, for one, want the military to be a good representation of our society, not just do bottom fishing.

-t

Then write your representatives, and let them know that they should increase funding for pay/benefits, etc.

SpaceMonkey · Jul 13, 2009, 04:45 PM

If Obama (closet smoker) really was behind all of this, you'd think the conclusion would be the exact opposite...

0bama on the other hand, now this is just the kind of thing he would do.

Zeeb · Jul 13, 2009, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Smoking ban for the military makes sense and is not a violation of rights.

It's in the best interest of the military that our soldiers be in as good physical condition as possible. Smoking is detrimental to one's physical condition (regardless of cancer, it wreaks havoc with your lungs). Therefore, it is in the military's best interest that soldiers (and sailors and airmen) not smoke.

It is not a violation of rights because military service is voluntary. If you don't want to give up your smoking habit, don't join the military.

Even though it may actually be better for enlistees I am against this particular smoking ban. I do think that soldiers should be made to follow the rules that civilians do in regard to smoking however (such as having to go outdoors). I was quite in favor of smoking bans in the bars in NYC, since someone else smoking in an enclosed space affects everyone in that space. However, catching a whiff of smoke from the outside as I enter such an establishment doesn't harm me.

All kinds of small freedoms can be taken away from people based upon your rationale. Service people already have to put up with so much and are often miserable. If the military is so concerned about smokers they should address the root cause of the problem--which is the awful mental state many troops have to deal with. I think the rising suicide rates among members of the military is much more distressing.

SpaceMonkey · Jul 13, 2009, 04:47 PM

DoD just needs to start referring to all cigarettes as "fags." Problem solved.

Dakar V · Jul 13, 2009, 04:49 PM

...and enact a rule that you can't use the term "smoke" but must replace it with "go down on".

ctt1wbw · Jul 13, 2009, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by Laminar

ctt1whatever just doesn't like Obama because he's black.

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by Laminar

ctt1whatever just doesn't like Obama because he's black.

ctt1whatever is black ? Didn't know that...

-t

ctt1wbw · Jul 13, 2009, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

DoD just needs to start referring to all cigarettes as "fags." Problem solved.

That's what alot of people in the military call others inside the beltway.

ctt1wbw · Jul 13, 2009, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

ctt1whatever is black ? Didn't know that...

-t

No, I'm a Scottish American. I'm not white.

So, yeah, I'm white. I guess I hate Obama because he's black, not because he's an idiot or has no clue as to how many states are in the Union, or has ever owned a business and had to write paychecks or anything like that.

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw

So, yeah, I'm white. I guess I hate Obama because he's black,

Isn't calling Obama black a bit of an overstatement ?

Along those lines, I'd like to think of myself as a black caucasian...

-t

ort888 · 05:57 PM

Do you honesty think he doesn't know how many states are in the country? Really?

How many President's have owned businesses? GW Bush couldn't run a business for poop. Clinton never owned a business. Bush Sr. was a great business owner and only a 1 termer. Reagan never owned a business. Carter was also a great business owner...

EDIT

Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford = ALSO NOT BUSINESS OWNERS

The only two business owners since Truman in the 40s were both one termers.

ort888 · Jul 13, 2009, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Isn't calling Obama black a bit of an overstatement ?

Along those lines, I'd like to think of myself as a black caucasian...

-t

He likes basketball... isn't that enough?

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

He likes basketball... isn't that enough?

Actually, you are right. That's all it takes to be a great black / community leader

-t

ort888 · Jul 13, 2009, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Actually, you are right. That's all it takes to be a great black / community leader

-t

Have you seen his jump shot? It's amazing.

Just don't watch him bowl.

ShortcutToMoncton · Jul 13, 2009, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

The grapes... so sour.

I lol'd.

SpaceMonkey · Jul 13, 2009, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

Have you seen his jump shot? It's amazing.

Just don't watch him bowl.

I can't help but notice that none of the senators at the confirmation hearing have asked Sotamayor about her bowling. Where is the oversight?

SpaceMonkey · Jul 13, 2009, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw

That's what alot of people in the military call others inside the beltway.

Um. Okay.

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

I can't help but notice that none of the senators at the confirmation hearing have asked Sotamayor about her bowling. Where is the oversight?

I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not be better at bowling than a white male who hasn't lived that life.

-t

SpaceMonkey · Jul 13, 2009, 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not be better at bowling than a white male who hasn't lived that life.

-t

If you're bowling in Puerto Rico, sure.

ghporter · Jul 13, 2009, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by andi*pandi

Maybe a compromise is to make the cigs sold on base just as expensive as elsewhere. A deterrent, but not a ban.

I can't tell you how disgusting it is to see an old guy in a motorized scooter and on oxygen scooting up to the cigarette section in the Commissary to get his five or six cartons...because he can afford them at the tax-free, subsidized prices the Commissary sells them for.

Originally Posted by ort888

Maybe they could have special programs for soldiers who want to quit and offer incentives for them to join. I dunno.

I agree that smoking is bad and soldiers smoking probably makes them (marginally) less combat effective, so maybe something does need to be done. Something. Not a ban.

Isn't alcohol banned already? I was under the impression that soldiers in Iraq don't have access to booze and are not allowed to drink. Is this true?

There are a LOT of "quit smoking" programs on bases and posts everywhere. The programs work, but the individuals have to enroll in them for them to do something. The thing is that fitness tests (and real mission-driven need for fitness and exertion) don't truly tax the young folks who do the most physical work, and once they get to be older, their combat taskings are often lesser and fitness testing standards more lax as well. And not to point fingers, but since I retired, I have seen enough people so out of shape in Army, Navy, and Air Force uniforms (not Marines or Coasties for some reason), that I think I could STILL pass a fitness test, and I'm 20 pounds heavier than when I retired.

To my knowledge there is no ban on alcohol in any non-combat base or facility anywhere in the world.

Originally Posted by turtle777

Yes, AFAIK, alcohol is banned.

Question is: what's next ? Coffee ? Chewing gum ?

-t

Turtle, who told you alcohol was banned? It would be a surprise to Army and Air Force Morale, Welfare and Recreation units world wide. And it would bankrupt them. The Army and Air Force Exchange Service also sells tax-free bottled booze, and would be in a seriously bad financial position if they had to stop.

Before smoking became an issue, alcohol use was an obvious and critical threat to mission accomplishment. And it's at least in part because of the culture of alcohol use-and abuse-that it seems all military services have developed. But as recently as 2004, I could have a beer at lunch - IN UNIFORM ON BASE - and nobody would bat an eye. And I keep an eye on what's happening in the services, and there have been no blanket bans on alcohol anywhere that have made the military news outlets-and there would be a LOT of stories about that if it were to happen.

turtle777 · Jul 13, 2009, 07:11 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

I can't tell you how disgusting it is to see an old guy in a motorized scooter and on oxygen scooting up to the cigarette section in the Commissary to get his five or six cartons...because he can afford them at the tax-free, subsidized prices the Commissary sells them for.

Well, I was more thinking "on" the job, while doing a tour in Iraq, on the field.

At least, there's no alcohol for the Navy on the ships.

I don;'t know where the army draws it's line.

-t

Wiskedjak · Jul 13, 2009, 11:35 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Nanny state, part 342,452.

It's not gonna end here. Obama is gonna dictate every last detail of our lives.

-t

Nanny statification isn't limited to liberals. There's plenty of social conservative nanny state laws.