How about this for a bonus, you get a green card and your allowed to stay in America, otherwise get out! If these people love America so much they should fight for the country they love! Simple as that. Less money spent on both sides and a fuller stronger Army.
Do you have any idea what this article was talking about--from your response, I would say NO! What it is saying is that any Soldier eligible to reenlist, any Future Soldier, or anyone eligible for Special Duty Pay, i.e. Doctors, Retention and Recruiting Personnel--all will not be getting whatever their eligible for until this situation gets resolved. No where was there any mention of people with Green Cards, so where did you come up with that. The above individuals are fighting for our country everyday whether they are overseas or not, just by virtue of their service.
Originally posted by southerner15: lacy_ann_taylor,
Do you have any idea what this article was talking about--from your response, I would say NO! What it is saying is that any Soldier eligible to reenlist, any Future Soldier, or anyone eligible for Special Duty Pay, i.e. Doctors, Retention and Recruiting Personnel--all will not be getting whatever their eligible for until this situation gets resolved. No where was there any mention of people with Green Cards, so where did you come up with that. The above individuals are fighting for our country everyday whether they are overseas or not, just by virtue of their service.
Perhaps a little too "lacy"? Or the tailored lines of ANN TAILOR?
It seems ultra liberal lefty lawyers added in a highly controveral provision to a bill that was a slam dunk. What scum! Can anyone identify the specific Dirt Bags that plugged this into the bill? My son, who will be a 4th generation military man, reports to boot camp this month. He is due a large bonus for being recruited into the "Special Warfare" comunity. Nothin like messin with the wrong guys.
What a great commander-in-chief...not! All this over a measly 1/2% for men and women fighting a war he started but refuses to bring them home because he made a mistake. Yes, he's behind the military alright--hiding behind them!
This and other inequities are just another indicator of the attitudes of the govt and the people of the unites states of amerika towards its militiary people. Let the liberal bastards fight their own wars and battles. screw em all.
Originally posted by jarnold15: What a great commander-in-chief...not! All this over a measly 1/2% for men and women fighting a war he started but refuses to bring them home because he made a mistake. Yes, he's behind the military alright--hiding behind them!
I have to wonder how you got to be a bird Colonel with such poor reading comprehension skills. As I read this and other stories about the veto, Bush could care less about the 3.5%. The veto was over a section inserted into the Defense bill that would permit people to file lawsuits against Iraq for the crimes of Saddam Hussein. Obviously, Saddam and his psychopathic son Uday committed so many murders and other crimes that no government could last against lawsuits arising from their actrions. It would be as if people could sue Hitler & Co.
Whatevere happened to the urgency to get this Bill passed soon so the War would continue to be funded, and if not passed soon the Defense Department would have to find ways to cope with the situation?
I see the article talks about the Army,Navy and a little about the Marines. This probably a stupid question but I am sure it includes the National Guard also. Just wondering before I sign my papers and not get a bonus when I am supposed to.
If the President wants to **** on the people fighting for him, time to lay off the civilian contractors, and put a nice little note with the pink slip that says, "you can thank your president for this!" They get paid so much more then the people actually doing the fighting, time to put the money into the hands of the people that deserve it the most.
Sorry, but it applies to Reserves, so I'm sure it does to you, as well. Bunch of folks are having to make decisions as to what to do as there is no guarantee that whatever they come up with will be retroactive. When is your ETS? Right now there are folks lined up to do their Army reenlistments in DC in Apr who are holding out till the last minute--sort of like having a party and no one showing up.
quote:
Originally posted by 5108190: I see the article talks about the Army,Navy and a little about the Marines. This probably a stupid question but I am sure it includes the National Guard also. Just wondering before I sign my papers and not get a bonus when I am supposed to.
For a retired E-7 you surprise me. Your lack of writing skills are atrocious, i.e. you can't even spell United or America!! Also, most liberals do not fight wars; they just want the freedoms generated by those who do fight.
quote:
Originally posted by AFRet91: This and other inequities are just another indicator of the attitudes of the govt and the people of the unites states of amerika towards its militiary people. Let the liberal bastards fight their own wars and battles. screw em all.
Seems to me that most of the angst over the pay involves a lack of understanding of the budget process. The 3% was determined in late 2006, submitted by the services to DoD at that time. DoD's budget was the rolled into the President's Budget that was required to be submitted in February 2007. The amount is determined by law and really isn't a 'raise' in the classical sense, although seen as one by most military and civilian employees. This is actually just an adjustment to the pay scales to prevent inflation from eating away at your true raises - every 24 months of service and every promotion.
By the way, next year's has ALREADY BEEN calculated according to the same law and is currently being submitted through the same process so the President can submit the FY 2009 budget next month. And you can bet that Congress will play football with it again next fall because they like to stir you up to get your vote. And many will fall for it again next year, as they do every year. No one seems to remember that the adjustment used to come on the first day of the FISCAL year (1 October) but Congress cut a (supposedly one-time) deal to move it back to 1 Jan for one year to save some cash. It never went back to 1 October and to my knowledge Congress was never called on that one. 3 extra months of a 3% raise would yield more than the half percent everyone is so worked up about...
Whatevere happened to the urgency to get this Bill passed soon so the War would continue to be funded, and if not passed soon the Defense Department would have to find ways to cope with the situation?
Evidently another LIE.
Again, another misunderstanding of the process. The Appropriation Bill has been passed and signed into law allowing DoD to operate (hence the 3% raise currently seen), with the exception of various programs that are limited by law - such as the various bonus and incentives provisions that are only extended for a year at a time BY CONGRESS. This is done through the Authorization Act, which is the legislation currently pending. The House came back last week, the Senate did not get back until this week since about half seem to be running for Pres.
The additional funding needed to get through the end of the year was asked for in the supplemental appropriation request. Appropriation bills have the money, authorization acts don't. Again the current dispute is the act that would AUTHORIZE the services to offer bonus/incentive payments and authorize/direct the extra .5% that is above the amount provided for in current law.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: dogfacedjarhead,
