With Veterans Day Coming Up...

[Lemon law]

I don't want to rain on this parade, but someone has to play the devil's advocate.

So this veterans days, its time to grant the highest honors to US soldiers like Charles Granger, and Linde England who make Americans so proud of our serving soldiers. And while we are at it, its not too late to promote LT. Calley to five star general.

As I will be the first to admit, that is a totally false cheap shot that besmirches almost all the men and women who served in our military.

But still, we must ask, why is that so false given the shameful way this nation has treated our homecoming veterans ever since WW2?

I am far too young to have served In WW2, but returning WW2 vets were given preference in employment, and if you had a dishonorable discharge, you had little chance of being hired. As WW2 Vets were given ticker tape parades, and now as they become a vanishing species, they still have a comradeship and the enduring gratitude of this nation.

That tradition started to erode in the Korean war, as returning vets forgot to deliver victory. And turned decidedly toxic in the Vietnam war. Especially among the unthinking antiwar folks, who greeted our returning vets with taunts as baby killers. But still the more rational antiwar crowd reserved their anger for our rat fink politicians.

But at least the Vietnam experience ended our US military adventures for a few decades, until the first Gulf war in the early 1990's when the US military enjoyed a brief popularity.

Now were are mired in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and returning US Veterans probably get worse treatment from the US population at large than any time in US history. As many return with debilitating wounds and Psychological damage and become expensive drains on the US treasury. As the USA figures new ways to deny them the benefits they need and deserve. As for preferential hiring, returning Vets are mostly denied jobs.

I am a self confessed anti war type, but am I alone in saying we have treated our recent military vets with shameful contempt and neglect. Sure we can have one special day when we all pay lip service to our military vets, but what about the other 364 days of the year when we defacto shit on them instead for having too much faith in our stupid politicians?

 

[Craig234]

That's not one of your more coherent posts, Lemon, mixing up the issues of some 'bad apple' soldiers with the issue of 'how veterans are treated'.

You're criticizing the anti-war people in Vietnam for calling the soldiers 'baby killers', but what exactly was wrong with that? The soldiers who went certainly didn't do it with the intent of killing babies - and they didn't go up to babies and shoot them and laugh in pleasure - but the fact is, they did choose to serve the government telling them to go to war in Vietnam and to carry out measures that killed an estimate two million Vietnamese people in a misguided war to 'stop communism's spread' that was really much more not even about preserving European immoral colonization of the third world - which is what it was when we backed the French restoring their occupation - but more some notion of 'projection of American power' or such nonsense that's quite indefensible and DID kill countless babies from bombs and other war effects.

So while the protesters were often risking jail to not kill people - including some babies - for no good reason, they did criticize those who willingly did. That's not to overly demonize the soldiers - take John Kerry as an example, who volunteered for the war and then returned to be a leader in the anti-war movement - or Al Gore who served as well IIRC. These weren't 'monsters wanting to kill babies', but they came to understand the war was wrong and that's what the protesters were saying.

The fact that Korean war vets returning got less of a welcome because 'they didn't get victory' is more about the problem that people care more about victory right or wrong than the morality of the war. Had Hitler won and when he did, he got plenty of cheering crowds too, which don't make his wars morally good.

We don't treat our vets terribly well; the Democrats try to do more for them while the Republicans, while using them for speeches, vote for many fewer benefits while also voting for a lot more much more expensive privatization of war with contractors. But concern for that is balanced with there being some benefit to military service being less attractive, to try to reduce the amount of people signing up to let the government tell them who to go kill because 'they can use the money'.

The underlying corruption is in those who support war pretty blindly, whether it's voting for politicians who will start unjust wars and excessive militarization, or sign up to do the killing happy to let the government say who should be killed even if it's immoral. If low spending for the soldiers helps reduce the numbers willing to sign up, that has some benefit to reducing our oversized military. We can use helping young people have more reason to reconsider joining during these times.

If all they hear is the praise of how it's 'patriotic' and 'serving their country' and the benefits and they don't appreciate the moral issues, including the questionable use the military is often put to - Vietnam being an example - then too many are likely to be seduced whether from misguided 'patriotism' or the financial benefits. We need them to hear another side of the issue and reconsider letting the government use them in a killing machine.

 

[palehorse]

But concern for that is balanced with there being some benefit to military service being less attractive, to try to reduce the amount of people signing up to let the government tell them who to go kill because 'they can use the money'.

The underlying corruption is in those who support war pretty blindly, whether it's voting for politicians who will start unjust wars and excessive militarization, or sign up to do the killing happy to let the government say who should be killed even if it's immoral. If low spending for the soldiers helps reduce the numbers willing to sign up, that has some benefit to reducing our oversized military. We can use helping young people have more reason to reconsider joining during these times.

If all they hear is the praise of how it's 'patriotic' and 'serving their country' and the benefits and they don't appreciate the moral issues, including the questionable use the military is often put to - Vietnam being an example - then too many are likely to be seduced whether from misguided 'patriotism' or the financial benefits. We need them to hear another side of the issue and reconsider letting the government use them in a killing machine.

Their time is much better served camping out, playing drums, and getting high in Zucotti Park, right?

 

[palehorse]

 

[dphantom]

truth there.

USAF (Ret)

 

[fskimospy]

Their time is much better served camping out, playing drums, and getting high in Zucotti Park, right?

There are plenty of veterans in Zuccotti Park.

 

[fskimospy]

How do 'too many people' not remember that? America is, without a doubt, the first world nation that loves its military beyond all others. To me the reverential fixation our country has with its armed forces is bizarre and bordering on dangerous, but still you ask for even more?

 

[xBiffx]

How do 'too many people' not remember that? America is, without a doubt, the first world nation that loves its military beyond all others. To me the reverential fixation our country has with its armed forces is bizarre and bordering on dangerous, but still you ask for even more?

Perhaps because we have a 100% volunteer force?

 

[FerrelGeek]

Only a complete moron would dis the tomb of the unknown soldier or any veteran period.

Something we can agree on! Thank you! 🙂

 

[fskimospy]

Perhaps because we have a 100% volunteer force?

So what? They are paid extraordinarily well as compared to their education and experience. They are further rewarded with immense education benefits and a life time of employment preference. Many other countries have all volunteer forces and they neither compensate them as handsomely or revere them to the same extent.

 

[xBiffx]

So what? They are paid extraordinarily well as compared to their education and experience. They are further rewarded with immense education benefits and a life time of employment preference. Many other countries have all volunteer forces and they neither compensate them as handsomely or revere them to the same extent.

Extraordinary?!? Many, but not all, in the armed forces could take their skills, experience, and education (if they have one) and make a bunch more money outside the military. Besides, the compensation you mention is small potatoes when you consider what they put on the line.

 

[fskimospy]

Extraordinary?!? Many, but not all, in the armed forces could take their skills, experience, and education (if they have one) and make a bunch more money outside the military. Besides, the compensation you mention is small potatoes when you consider what they put on the line.

A high school dropout can be making the equivalent of $60k a year within 2 years. That's not bad. A college graduate can be making the equivalent of six figures within 4. There are some private jobs where this is true, but not many.

Regardless, my point is that members of the military are rewarded perfectly well, I should know. I think that this is great, but it never seems to be enough, and there are always those bemoaning how poorly treated our armed forces are despite manifest evidence to the contrary.

 

[momeNt]

I think the disconnect between honoring veterans and not honoring veterans happened when the military-industrial-complex (MIC) planted the seed after WWII that the military in our country no longer is a tool for the defense of our freedoms, but a tool that can be used for political and corporate interests.

We wouldn't need the media to pound into our heads to honor the troops, support the troops, have fly-overs for every football game because we would understand that they protect our freedom, if we entered into wars that were actually defending this country. The (MIC) has to keep pushing this message so people don't demand that we bring our troops home, so we don't question what are protecting when we parade around burned veterans on DWTS.

Obviously I'm not a psychiatrist or psychologist, but I wonder how much of the struggles that soldiers have with PTSD is related to them perhaps feeling that they aren't fighting for anything that's worth fighting for. Did any of those soldier's honestly give a shit if Iraq had a democratically elected president or not? Would any of them be willing to die for that? Same goes with Vietnam, desert storm, korea. Pearl Harbor gave Americans something they were willing to die for, I can't say the same for Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.

 

[fskimospy]

Obviously I'm not a psychiatrist or psychologist, but I wonder how much of the struggles that soldiers have with PTSD is related to them perhaps feeling that they aren't fighting for anything that's worth fighting for. Did any of those soldier's honestly give a shit if Iraq had a democratically elected president or not? Would any of them be willing to die for that? Same goes with Vietnam, desert storm, korea. Pearl Harbor gave Americans something they were willing to die for, I can't say the same for Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.

I'm not aware of any connection between a soldier's feelings of a mission's legitimacy and their development of PTSD.

 

[FerrelGeek]

A high school dropout can be making the equivalent of $60k a year within 2 years. That's not bad. A college graduate can be making the equivalent of six figures within 4. There are some private jobs where this is true, but not many.

Regardless, my point is that members of the military are rewarded perfectly well, I should know. I think that this is great, but it never seems to be enough, and there are always those bemoaning how poorly treated our armed forces are despite manifest evidence to the contrary.

Granted, the link only shows base pay, but I don't see where a HS dropout will be making $60k equiv in 2 years.

http://www.navycs.com/2012-military-pay-chart.html

 

[xBiffx]

Granted, the link only shows base pay, but I don't see where a HS dropout will be making $60k equiv in 2 years.

http://www.navycs.com/2012-military-pay-chart.html

Plus I thought you had to have a diploma or GED to join the military. Could be different these days.

 

[fskimospy]

Granted, the link only shows base pay, but I don't see where a HS dropout will be making $60k equiv in 2 years.

http://www.navycs.com/2012-military-pay-chart.html

Yeap, there's your problem. It only shows base pay.

I made E-5 in just over a year and a half, got paid for it at ~the two year mark. If I were in today that would mean my base pay were $2,266. Then on top of that there's BAH, which for an E-5 without dependents is $1,731. On top of that we have BAS that is $325 a month. Very importantly, BAS and BAH are tax free, so in reality you can add 20-25% or so to those values, depending on where you're at. So say we add 20%, you end up with a monthly pay of somewhere a bit above $4700. That's awfully close to a yearly salary of $60k, and I didn't even include if the person had dependents, sea pay, nuke pay, hazardous duty pay, flight deck pay, swimmer pay, etc, etc, etc.

You can most certainly make $60k in 2 years.

 

[fskimospy]

Plus I thought you had to have a diploma or GED to join the military. Could be different these days.

Yes, you need a diploma or a GED to join. I was counting those with a GED as dropouts. I in fact never graduated high school, and joined with a GED.

 

[FerrelGeek]

How many people make E5 in just 2 years?

 

[xBiffx]

Yeap, there's your problem. It only shows base pay.

I made E-5 in just over a year and a half, got paid for it at ~the two year mark. If I were in today that would mean my base pay were $2,266. Then on top of that there's BAH, which for an E-5 without dependents is $1,731. On top of that we have BAS that is $325 a month. Very importantly, BAS and BAH are tax free, so in reality you can add 20-25% or so to those values, depending on where you're at. So say we add 20%, you end up with a monthly pay of somewhere a bit above $4700. That's awfully close to a yearly salary of $60k, and I didn't even include if the person had dependents, sea pay, nuke pay, hazardous duty pay, flight deck pay, swimmer pay, etc, etc, etc.

You can most certainly make $60k in 2 years.

Brother was an E-5 as well. He only got about $700 BAH and that was only like 4 years ago. So he was pretty much getting around $40K with everything factored in. When he got out, he got a government job doing the exact same thing (even same station) that he did in the Army and even with a couple of his old service buddies. He was making $80K then. No college degree at the time either. For him, he was getting the shaft as far as pay goes in the military.

Edit: Took him 4 years to get to E-5 and that was starting at E-2 because he was an eagle scout.

 

[momeNt]

I'm not aware of any connection between a soldier's feelings of a mission's legitimacy and their development of PTSD.

A quick google - which tbh I did not do before writing my first post - uncovered this.

Seminars in General Adult Psychiatry

By Greg Wilkinson

Public attitudes to war can also be important for the development and the severity of PTSD. The soldiers returning from the Second World War to the USA were welcomed home as war heroes but those returning from Vietnam, an unpopular war, were sometimes subjected to abuse and so the rates of PTSD were higher.

Doesn't sound scientific at all, no numbers provided. Also it could just be that many WWII vets just went on without PTSD diagnoses. Lots of ways to poke holes in the statement.

The troops here are the victims of the MIC though so we should obviously never turn on the victims but rather the corruption behind it all.

 

[Nebor]

Yeap, there's your problem. It only shows base pay.

I made E-5 in just over a year and a half, got paid for it at ~the two year mark. If I were in today that would mean my base pay were $2,266. Then on top of that there's BAH, which for an E-5 without dependents is $1,731. On top of that we have BAS that is $325 a month. Very importantly, BAS and BAH are tax free, so in reality you can add 20-25% or so to those values, depending on where you're at. So say we add 20%, you end up with a monthly pay of somewhere a bit above $4700. That's awfully close to a yearly salary of $60k, and I didn't even include if the person had dependents, sea pay, nuke pay, hazardous duty pay, flight deck pay, swimmer pay, etc, etc, etc.

You can most certainly make $60k in 2 years.

Completely disingenuous and you know it. You get a yearly statement of your total benefits, including estimates for how much your healthcare is worth, etc. and I seriously doubt an E-5s ever says $60k.

Nevermind that BAH @ $1700 for an E-5 would mean it's in one of the most expensive places in the country (ie that money is going straight into the higher cost of living.) Not to mention that many bases\posts require single E-5s to live in the barracks (thus they don't receive BAH.)

And I'm not sure why you think that BAH & BAS being tax free means they're worth 20-25% more either.

Also most people don't make E-5 in 2 years. That would be the province of a few select career fields\MOS\rates.

If you were going to make an argument regarding generous compensation for the military it should be targeted at officers, seeing has how virtually all E-5s and below with kids qualify for food stamps, WIC, etc. But while I wouldn't make the argument to raise officer pay, at the current pay rates we can't keep them past O-3 anyway due to headhunters offering them 50%+ pay raises and no chances of deployment.

 

[fskimospy]

How many people make E5 in just 2 years?

Depends on your rate. When I was in if you were an IT or an operations specialist, LOTS of people made E-5 in two years. If you were an electronics tech like I was, basically nobody made E-5 in two years. (good thing I'm so smart, huh?!)

 

[Nebor]

So what? They are paid extraordinarily well as compared to their education and experience. They are further rewarded with immense education benefits and a life time of employment preference. Many other countries have all volunteer forces and they neither compensate them as handsomely or revere them to the same extent.

Check out the pay rates for the Australian military. In every grade you'll see that they earn 50-100% more than an American in the same grade. And then there's their benefits, which are jaw dropping.

They actively poach service members from the UK, Canada and the US, and it works.

 

[MotF Bane]

I'm not aware of any connection between a soldier's feelings of a mission's legitimacy and their development of PTSD.

It does seem to have some logical basis worth investigating.