Soldier Mom Refusing to Report to Active Duty

[PokerGuy]

What's funny is that with the "hard line" approach that the military seems to be taking and that's advocated by some here, the negative PR makes it even more difficult for the military to recruit qualified candidates. The army spends all sorts of money trying to recruit women. What woman of child bearing age would want to enlist when she sees how you get treated if you do happen have a child?

Regardless of how you feel about her commitment etc, the welfare of the children has to come first. If there isn't a good option for their care without her, then she should stay. Everything else comes secondary to the welfare of those kids.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
What's funny is that with the "hard line" approach that the military seems to be taking and that's advocated by some here, the negative PR makes it even more difficult for the military to recruit qualified candidates. The army spends all sorts of money trying to recruit women. What woman of child bearing age would want to enlist when she sees how you get treated if you do happen have a child?

Regardless of how you feel about her commitment etc, the welfare of the children has to come first. If there isn't a good option for their care without her, then she should stay. Everything else comes secondary to the welfare of those kids.

Then why didn't she provide for their welfare first? Hey, I'm a father. It's in the best interest of my kids that I don't get hurt. If I'm in the service, you'd better let me out. Oh, I'm male, and easily replaced?

Sorry, she's an individual and I'm not unsympathetic for her or her children. I just happen to realize that if there are no consequences to her actions, then women of childbearing years should not be allowed to enlist. This isn't a game.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Now once you are there, suck it up. The military isn't Burger King. You can't quit and for good reason. The service is not for the benefit of the enlisted, it's for the protection of the country.

Force people to protect us? wow I feel so safe now...

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Dingster1
If she signed the single parent/military married to military paperwork stating that she is responsible for making arrangements for her children should she get deployed, she is out of luck.

and do what with the kids?

having the father quit his job is not the answere. then what? the goverment is going to support them.

best situation is put her in ajob stateside.

but htey really need to redo how they handle females in the milatary.

No the best situation is to make her own up and to do what she signed up to do!!
She knew very well what she was getting herself into!

Personally I can`t believe all these people on this site who CLAIM to have been duped by a recruiter.....

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Sh*ty situation. I have to wonder if a lot of people who join the military don't realize how terribly upheaving it can be to family life. I think that is the key reason against joining the military. Nothing like missing most of your kids' first years of life, eh? Sounds like a damn awful thing leaving your new baby and saying "see you in a year!".

No it`s not a sh^^ty situation!
She signed her name on the dotted line. Get over it....she has a obligation to go wherever the military says!
It`s no damn recruiters fault that she signed her name on that dotted line!

Bottom Line.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I heartily agree with this for two reasons. 1.) They are signing a contract that could lead to them being killed, and 2.) Military recruiters are liars. Horrible, horrible liars.

agreed 100%!

they intentionally not record the recruiting process so the recruitors can lie... from personally experience.. wasted 3 yrs of my life.

oral contract means nothing in military.

especially now that we are withdrawing from war, we should not be sending people over.

Who cares if they are signing a contract that could lead to them being killked??? duh...wake up smell the roses...thats why a country has a military. To defend itself and when you are called upon to go into battle you go! Plain and sinple!


Mot all military recruiters are liars. Suck it up and get over it!!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Now once you are there, suck it up. The military isn't Burger King. You can't quit and for good reason. The service is not for the benefit of the enlisted, it's for the protection of the country.

Force people to protect us? wow I feel so safe now...

It's somewhere in the job description. If someone wants to scrub floors, don't join the service. You may do just that, but you had better be ready to swap that mop for a rifle.

Let's make this simple. The military exists for one purpose. That is to kill people and break things. Politicians tack all sorts of things onto soldiers, but that is fluff.

To do that job better than the other people who kill and break things we have a sophisticated military, not spear chucking sword slashing buffoons. It's deadly serious. That means people are going to have to possibly work and do things they never would elsewhere. In those conditions, yes they are "forced" to do their job, because if they don't someone will die for it. Worst case nations fall because the ones they counted on didn't do what was required of them.

Yeah, it's a rough life. That's what one signs up for.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: palehorse
As a Reservist, every single major decision I make in my life must take into account the possibility of deployment. The same is true for every soldier, including those on IRR.

So, she most certainly has to do something to fulfill her obligation. A stateside assignment would make the most sense...

That's fine for her. Now when women get pregnant to get out of duty they don't like they'll have a precedent. "Hey, you let her get a cushy safe job. I want the same"

General discharge IMO.

I have to disagree with a general discharge. Some other person who signed the same agreement as she did will have to take her place. He/she might be killed over there, so letting her off with a general discharge is being too easy.

I take that position assuming that she hasn't already did a tour in either Iraq or Afghanistan. The article didn't say she did that I noticed so.....

If you look at the criteria for discharge I think it fits best. Perhaps less than honorable, but dishonorable is really reserved for criminals. Technically refusing to report is criminal, but to pursue that would single her out more than others in her place. Making a martyr out of her isn't a good thing, and I believe that that's not appropriate in any case. It's not like she shot a fellow soldier in the back.

Nevertheless, a fitting punishment would be the forfeiture of any benefits she earned while in the service.

That's the key IMO. You want out then forfeit the bennies.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: palehorse
As a Reservist, every single major decision I make in my life must take into account the possibility of deployment. The same is true for every soldier, including those on IRR.

So, she most certainly has to do something to fulfill her obligation. A stateside assignment would make the most sense...

That's fine for her. Now when women get pregnant to get out of duty they don't like they'll have a precedent. "Hey, you let her get a cushy safe job. I want the same"

General discharge IMO.

I have to disagree with a general discharge. Some other person who signed the same agreement as she did will have to take her place. He/she might be killed over there, so letting her off with a general discharge is being too easy.

I take that position assuming that she hasn't already did a tour in either Iraq or Afghanistan. The article didn't say she did that I noticed so.....

If you look at the criteria for discharge I think it fits best. Perhaps less than honorable, but dishonorable is really reserved for criminals. Technically refusing to report is criminal, but to pursue that would single her out more than others in her place. Making a martyr out of her isn't a good thing, and I believe that that's not appropriate in any case. It's not like she shot a fellow soldier in the back.

Nevertheless, a fitting punishment would be the forfeiture of any benefits she earned while in the service.

Other than GI Bill, those would be pretty much none.

Expecting someone to wait 4-6 years after their active duty discharge to have kids JUST IN CASE they get called up from IRR is completely laughable and unrealistic.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Now once you are there, suck it up. The military isn't Burger King. You can't quit and for good reason. The service is not for the benefit of the enlisted, it's for the protection of the country.

Force people to protect us? wow I feel so safe now...

It's somewhere in the job description. If someone wants to scrub floors, don't join the service. You may do just that, but you had better be ready to swap that mop for a rifle.

Let's make this simple. The military exists for one purpose. That is to kill people and break things. Politicians tack all sorts of things onto soldiers, but that is fluff.

To do that job better than the other people who kill and break things we have a sophisticated military, not spear chucking sword slashing buffoons. It's deadly serious. That means people are going to have to possibly work and do things they never would elsewhere. In those conditions, yes they are "forced" to do their job, because if they don't someone will die for it. Worst case nations fall because the ones they counted on didn't do what was required of them.

Yeah, it's a rough life. That's what one signs up for.

first you said military exists to "protect our country", now they exist just to "kill people and break things" ? .. way to contradict yourself...

Have you been in the military? I have, and trust me when I tell you , that most educated people (officers) in the military share the same view and most are rigorously against binding people to stay in military because :

1. its a waste of tax money
2. won't trust billion dollar equipment with people who don't even want to be there
3. won't trust their lives with people who don't want to be there

its mostly the un-educated (patti officers) that support forcing people to stay, for the sake of sick fun.

it is NOT a rough life, its a life-style. some may like it, some may not. we are not in war time, there is absolutely no need to force people to go.

btw, there are pretty much no benefit if you get out early. GI bill require full length of contract (3 yrs i believe).

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: dainthomas
Expecting someone to wait 4-6 years after their active duty discharge to have kids JUST IN CASE they get called up from IRR is completely laughable and unrealistic.

Nobody said that women should be expected to wait to have children. Mothers are, however, expected to take into account the possibility of deployment and plan accordingly for the proper care of their children if/when that happens. She obviously failed to do so...

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Mot all military recruiters are liars. Suck it up and get over it!!

so its okay to be lie? is that what you teach to your children?

a little lie = years of time wasted, tons of money spend. bad for our country and bad for its citizen.

you are either dumb or ignorant. pick one.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
Have you been in the military? I have, and trust me when I tell you , that most educated people (officers) in the military share the same view and most are rigorously against binding people to stay in military because :

1. its a waste of tax money
2. won't trust billion dollar equipment with people who don't even want to be there
3. won't trust their lives with people who don't want to be there

The same folks would more than likely support an 'other than honorable' discharge for those who do not wish to fulfill their obligations.

it is NOT a rough life, its a life-style. some may like it, some may not. we are not in war time, there is absolutely no need to force people to go.

We're not?!?

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: dainthomas
Expecting someone to wait 4-6 years after their active duty discharge to have kids JUST IN CASE they get called up from IRR is completely laughable and unrealistic.

Nobody said that women should be expected to wait to have children. Mother are, however, expected to take into account the the possibility of deployment and plan accordingly for the proper care of their children if/when that happens. She obviously failed to do so...

how could someone plan for the unexpected? what if there is no money to pay for the children? its siimply unrealistic and laughable.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
Have you been in the military? I have, and trust me when I tell you , that most educated people (officers) in the military share the same view and most are rigorously against binding people to stay in military because :

1. its a waste of tax money
2. won't trust billion dollar equipment with people who don't even want to be there
3. won't trust their lives with people who don't want to be there

The same folks would more than likely support an 'other than honorable' discharge for those who do not wish to fulfill their obligations.

that'd be fine.

fyi, if you read your book, its called a "general discharge" with reason "other than honorable"

it is NOT a rough life, its a life-style. some may like it, some may not. we are not in war time, there is absolutely no need to force people to go.

We're not?!?

we are ?? FYI, Bush is gone...

we are withdrawing (finally).

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Now once you are there, suck it up. The military isn't Burger King. You can't quit and for good reason. The service is not for the benefit of the enlisted, it's for the protection of the country.

Force people to protect us? wow I feel so safe now...

It's somewhere in the job description. If someone wants to scrub floors, don't join the service. You may do just that, but you had better be ready to swap that mop for a rifle.

Let's make this simple. The military exists for one purpose. That is to kill people and break things. Politicians tack all sorts of things onto soldiers, but that is fluff.

To do that job better than the other people who kill and break things we have a sophisticated military, not spear chucking sword slashing buffoons. It's deadly serious. That means people are going to have to possibly work and do things they never would elsewhere. In those conditions, yes they are "forced" to do their job, because if they don't someone will die for it. Worst case nations fall because the ones they counted on didn't do what was required of them.

Yeah, it's a rough life. That's what one signs up for.

first you said military exists to "protect our country", now they exist just to "kill people and break things" ? .. way to contradict yourself...

Have you been in the military? I have, and trust me when I tell you , that most educated people (officers) in the military share the same view and most are rigorously against binding people to stay in military because :

1. its a waste of tax money
2. won't trust billion dollar equipment with people who don't even want to be there
3. won't trust their lives with people who don't want to be there

its mostly the un-educated (patti officers) that support forcing people to stay, for the sake of sick fun.

it is NOT a rough life, its a life-style. some may like it, some may not. we are not in war time, there is absolutely no need to force people to go.

btw, there are pretty much no benefit if you get out early. GI bill require full length of contract (3 yrs i believe).

I was in some little backwater country in SE Asia, so yeah, that qualifies as service.

Let me break this down for you. The military isn't the Maginot Line. It doesn't just sit there, although if you have been in the service you should know that.

The Military Politic is an intimating force that deters attack. In that sense it defends. But why? Because if it becomes active, it can kill you and break your stuff. Don't they teach you this stuff any more? You do many things in the military, but the entire purpose of it is that at need, it fights. Fighting consists of killing and breaking things.

I don't know, but when I was in we fought, prepared to fight, or kept ourselves busy in the meantime. I guess that's all changed now. I'm sure you just look down on us as grunts. That's life.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
Have you been in the military? I have, and trust me when I tell you , that most educated people (officers) in the military share the same view and most are rigorously against binding people to stay in military because :

1. its a waste of tax money
2. won't trust billion dollar equipment with people who don't even want to be there
3. won't trust their lives with people who don't want to be there

The same folks would more than likely support an 'other than honorable' discharge for those who do not wish to fulfill their obligations.

that'd be fine.

it is NOT a rough life, its a life-style. some may like it, some may not. we are not in war time, there is absolutely no need to force people to go.

We're not?!?

we are ?? FYI, Bush is gone...

we are withdrawing (finally).

Is that what your homeroom teacher told you?

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
Have you been in the military? I have,

Oh, and I call BS on that.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Oh, and I call BS on that.

oh like i was gonna scan and send you my dd-214. damn scammer.

we are not in war with Afg. we are legally there and withdrawing.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Oh, and I call BS on that.

oh like i was gonna scan and send you my dd-214. damn scammer.

Where/when did you serve? What capacity? MOS?

we are not in war with Afg. we are legally there and withdrawing.

[/quote]

It's statements like that which make me doubt you have any comprehension of current world events.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider.

I don't know, but when I was in we fought, prepared to fight, or kept ourselves busy in the meantime. I guess that's all changed now. I'm sure you just look down on us as grunts. That's life.

respectfully, I do honor your service, and thank you for protecting our country, and truthfully I do not look down nor think you are a grunt.

however, we do have difference in opinion. To serve should be a honor, it should never be forced. I don't know how recruiting was at the time, but now a days its rightfully sick and full of lies that has wasted tons of my hard earned tax money, and crucified years of valuable time for many many people. please try to understand that.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Oh, and I call BS on that.

oh like i was gonna scan and send you my dd-214. damn scammer.

Where/when did you serve? What capacity? MOS?

I thought you called BS on that... contradictions... contradictions..

we are not in war with Afg. we are legally there and withdrawing.

It's statements like that which make me doubt you have any comprehension of current world events.

most people don't thnk we are in war

time to shut it?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
we are?? FYI, Bush is gone...

we are withdrawing (finally).

Sure we are.

I'm deploying to Iraq in May.

We're also in the process of increasing our forces in Afghanistan -- 17k more troops this year, and counting -- regardless of Bush's absence.

You're g'damn right we're at war right now.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider.

I don't know, but when I was in we fought, prepared to fight, or kept ourselves busy in the meantime. I guess that's all changed now. I'm sure you just look down on us as grunts. That's life.

respectfully, I do honor your service, and thank you for protecting our country, and truthfully I do not look down nor think you are a grunt.

however, we do have difference in opinion. To serve should be a honor, it should never be forced. I don't know how recruiting was at the time, but now a days its right now sick and full of lies that has wasted tons of my hard earned tax money, and crucified years of valuable time for many many people. please try to understand that.

I'm merely frustrated that some seem to take their commitment so casually. This is going to sound more corny than anything else perhaps but duty and honor means something. I can understand you not wanting to serve with people who have no concept of what I'm speaking about. My beef is that people who join should be prepared and plan for things. They have that duty, honor notwithstanding. Note I didn't say she should be held captive, but I do believe there need to be consequences for her actions. I get a feeling from some that it's a revolving door and if you say "hey if I can't do things my way I'll just walk" like any other job. How can one maintain order and the needed discipline if commitment is so casually dismissed?

Eh, I'm old school, and not really upset with you.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Oh, and I call BS on that.

oh like i was gonna scan and send you my dd-214. damn scammer.

Where/when did you serve? What capacity? MOS?

I thought you called BS on that... contradictions... contradictions..

So I call BS, ask you to provide minimal proof, and that is somehow contradicting myself? Do you know what 'contradiction' means?

we are not in war with Afg. we are legally there and withdrawing.

It's statements like that which make me doubt you have any comprehension of current world events.

most people don't thnk we are in war

time to shut it?

Our military is in a state of war. People are shooting other people in a foreign nation. Call it what you want, but it's a state of war.

And no, we are not withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, as you keep insisting. We are in fact sending more.

So yes, it's time for you to shut it.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
You aren't going spend your time in Maui on the beach.

Damnit. I knew something was fishy when that guy at the MEPS asked me where I wanted to be stationed.