undermanned in 2003, undermanned in 2008

[boutons_]

Stop-loss enslavement of the military (military outright violates the enlistment contract. As always with conservatives, organizations crush individuals) to continue at least through 2009. Does anybody think stop-loss will not continue indefinitely?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2008-04-21-stoploss_N.htm?csp=34

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/21/general-army-needs-stoplo_n_97844.html



Criminal backgrounds are OK for military service:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/21/AR2008042103295.html?hpid=moreheadlines&hpid=topnews

Red-state super-patriots and 10M Limbaugh listeners, where are you when dubya needs you for his bullshit Iraq oil-grab and occupation?

[RandomGuy]

Actually, the military doens't violate the enlistment contract.

They simply activate a little-known clause in it, the kind of clause that they don't really tell you about when you first sign up.

[RandomGuy]

Here is one of the things that shows one of the hidden costs of the war.

They relax the enlistment standards just a little in regards to criminal behavior, and accept an increased risk of "bad apples". These bad apples cause all sorts of problems and costs themselves.

Combat zones are not known for their "humanizing" effects.

[mrsmaalox]

The Army is the only branch of the military that uses "stop-loss".

[xrayzebra]

The Army is the only branch of the military that uses "stop-loss".

Yep, the other services wont let some re-enlist. The
military is in a fix. Congress wont raise levels or give
them enough money for much of anything and bitch
about their problems. Meanwhile the reserves get it
stuck to them. But of course, boutons and others like him
in Congress blame everyone else for the problem.

[DarrinS]

Stop-loss enslavement of the military (military outright violates the enlistment contract. As always with conservatives, organizations crush individuals) to continue at least through 2009. Does anybody think stop-loss will not continue indefinitely?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2008-04-21-stoploss_N.htm?csp=34

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/21/general-army-needs-stoplo_n_97844.html



Criminal backgrounds are OK for military service:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/21/AR2008042103295.html?hpid=moreheadlines&hpid=topnews

Red-state super-patriots and 10M Limbaugh listeners, where are you when dubya needs you for his bullshit Iraq oil-grab and occupation?



Feigning interest in the military to make a political statement.

Classy.

[Wild Cobra]

Boutons make veterans like myself sick. Just a crybaby that doesn't even have a dog in the fight.

[xrayzebra]

You know WC, people like boutons wouldn't make a wart on a
GI's butt. But they are the ones that our stupid people in Congress
listen to. It is sickening.

[PEP]

Hey boutons I asked you before which you never answered, have you ever served, have you done your part in GWOT?

The stop loss is written in the contract that is signed when you enlist, so you shouldnt be surprised when/if you ever get hit with it. If you read page 2 of the DD 4, stop-loss is covered in there.


But you'll always have the cry-babies like you that sit around and bitch and moan.

[boutons_]

"Feigning interest"

proof?

I support the military much more than dubya and all his voters combined.