whoami0470 whoami0470

Bush sucks

▼

Bush sucks

from JoeUser Forums
Now that Bush has won, our country is going to be a failure! He will draft your kids, their kids, and alot of other innocent americans. I dont know about you but Im not trying to go to war just to get my self killed!! All those people over there getting beheaded and tortured, there is NO use for that! And guess what, even after those people are getting killed, guess who sends more innocent people over in Iraq???? Huh,answer that. WAKE UP ITS BUSH!!!!! Forget him, Idont even think people should even pay taxes to give this guy his outragous salary that he gets!! 200,000.00 a year!! Well you guys can do what ever you want, but ive made my decision,.....................SCREW BUSH!!!!!


THE END
democrat
28,796 views 70 replies
Reply #26 from PolMach Forums Top
their commitments to the military fullfilled


Somehow i think your definition of fulfilled is different than the governments. Obviously they havent fulfilled all commitments.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #26 By: Mitch21 - 11/12/2004 10:56:11 PM
their commitments to the military fullfilled


Somehow i think your definition of fulfilled is different than the governments. Obviously they havent fulfilled all commitments.


The problem arises from the fact that they did not read their enlistment contracts. I'm not really sure of what is is now (maybe Grim could help.) But when you sign on the dotted line you give Uncle Sam the controlling strings to your life for "6" years. You may be only doing 2-4 as active but he still owns your soul for 2-4 *more* years. What it is that they figure my 2 yrs of active service is done and I should be able to get out and go home. WRONG! Uncle Sam decides, not them.
Galactic Civilizations IV
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #26 By: Mitch21 - 11/12/2004 10:56:11 PM
their commitments to the military fullfilled


Somehow i think your definition of fulfilled is different than the governments. Obviously they havent fulfilled all commitments.


The problem arises from the fact that they did not read their enlistment contracts. I'm not really sure of what is is now (maybe Grim could help.) But when you sign on the dotted line you give Uncle Sam the controlling strings to your life for "6" years. You may be only doing 2-4 as active but he still owns your soul for 2-4 *more* years. What it is that they figure my 2 yrs of active service is done and I should be able to get out and go home. WRONG! Uncle Sam decides, not them.
Reply #29 from PolMach Forums Top
Excuse me have you been living in a cave? First and foremost, everyone get this through your skull! Bush *can not* impose a draft all by himself. He has to have the senate backing for that! Do you think your senator would vote *for* this? Not if he wants to keep his/her political career going they won't!

I guess if you can't compose a coherent argument, you must resort to name calling. Wow, something new from the right.
Bush has a majority in both houses. He will have no choice but to impose a draft. He's already painted himself into a corner by overextending the reserves. 9 of 10 of our active divisions have already been to Iraq or Afghanistan or both. They've been there for extended tours. Stop gap has been in place since the beginning of the war. Those who want to leave the military cannot and for those in the active service, they have their tours extended in Iraq until they agree to reenlist. The definition of conscription according to Webster's is "One who is compulsorily enlisted in the armed service. Sounds pretty apt to me. So the question is not when will Bush begin the draft. The question should be when will the situation allow the draft to stop. Continuing on the current failed policies, no end in sight.
What is the difference in not being allowed to leave the military and being drafted?
So crawl out from under your rock and open your eyes to what is happening.
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
Give me a minute, and I can tell you exactly what it says on the contract . . .
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
a. FOR ALL ENLISTEES: If this is my initial enlistment, I must serve a total of eight (8) years. Any part of that service not served on active duty must be served in a Reserve Component unless I am sooner discharged.

b. If I am a member of a Reserve Component of an Armed Force at the beginning of a period of war or national emergency declared by Congress, or if I become a member during that period, my military service may be extended without my consent until six (6) months after the end of that period of war.
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top

first of im NOT in 8th grade, u dont know what your talking about, and i bet i know more about polotics then you will ever know in your life!!!


Your spelling certainly suggests that you're in 8th grade....no wait, I take that back.  I have a 4th grader who spells better than you do here, and who also has a better grasp of the political climate than you.


Whoman: I cannot speak for any other branch of service, but I can categorically state that stop-loss (not stop gap) is NOT in effect in the US Air Force.  People can, and are, separating from the service (my husaband's squadron lost 2 people last week, and his career field is considered 'critical').  In all his years in the service, he says that he cannot recall hearing of one person who was made to stay in Iraq (or any other location) until they agreed to re-enlist.  I can't either.


 

Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
Whoman:

You're really oversimplifying the situation. There is NO WAY anyone would vote to reinstate the draft. You know why? Because almost every citizen would oppose it completely and utterly. Any congressman that votes for the measure has ensured the collapse of his career. Every person of draft age who would get drawn in as a result would resent them for it, and vote against them at every opportunity. The parents of the young men and women who would end up getting drafted would vote against them at every opportunity. Every person who was against the last draft will vote against them at every opportunity.

No one wants forced military service. We saw how well it all went over last time
Reply #34 from PolMach Forums Top
If I am a member of a Reserve Component of an Armed Force at the beginning of a period of war or national emergency declared by Congress, or if I become a member during that period, my military service may be extended without my consent until six (6) months after the end of that period of war.


That contract does not cover active duty soldiers who are unable to leave the service after they put in their time.

Additionally its been more than a year after Bush formally declared the war over.
Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top

That contract does not cover active duty soldiers who are unable to leave the service after they put in their time.


Actually, it does.


 

Reply #36 from PolMach Forums Top
Actually, it does.


Show me where. Stop gap was a separate law first used in the early 90s.

Either way, the fact remains that 4 more years of the current policies will greatly overextend the current military.
Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top

. Stop gap was a separate law first used in the early 90s.


It's 'stop-loss', and I'll go ask my neighbor (an AF recruiter) to provide me with the contract.


The current military is over extended, yes.  But you have to look at the reasons it came to be over extended.  8 years of Clinton downsizing didn't help matters much.  I don't think that you can blame Bush for the entire problem.

Reply #38 from PolMach Forums Top
I can't belive how LOW some Americans have gone. There used to be a time when our President was respected, our troops honored because we KNEW that we were fighting for a cause. YOu tell my father and his brothers that they aren't fighting for anything but death in Iraq!! You are nothing but a cowardly spot on the ground that doesn't desverve to live in AMerica. The only resaon we are still here today is because our forfathers sacrifice. You people could not be more ingrateful.
Reply #39 from PolMach Forums Top
Show me where. Stop gap was a separate law first used in the early 90s.

Either way, the fact remains that 4 more years of the current policies will greatly overextend the current military.


Stop-loss is used to prevent a shortage of RAMP strength in a key MOS field. If the estimated or contracted outgoing are greater than the amount incoming a stop-loss is initiated, in fact several stop losses took place on key personnel during Afghanistan before we even started to manuver against Iraq. As for the contract bit that IS the part that covers Active Duty soldiers.
When you sign up for Active Duty you sign up for X years plus X years Ready Reserve period. If that was pulled from Tex's husband's contract that means he must either serve a total of 8 years (Active / Ready Reserve) which can be broken down into something like this (2 years Active, gets out and is put on Ready Reserve list for 6 years, etc.) Lee1776 would be the better person to answer this question so find a blog of his and ask him the question, he deals with this.

Stop Gap is not a term used by the Military, nor have I ever heard any single fellow soldier or officer use the terms Stop Gap, instead the proper military term is Stop Loss, unless I am wrong for being former Army who is the son of LTC - retired Army and grandson of one SSG and one 1SG both Army. Let alone I have friends like Jerry (Army - Vietnam) and Beau (Marines - Vietnam) plus many more.

Stop Loss is USED for sending MANNED units into Combat, and to not to allow sending undermanned units into combat.
Unless somebody has a sick love of sending undermanned units into combat.

I will type more later, I have to go.

- Grim
Reply #40 from PolMach Forums Top
It's 'stop-loss', and I'll go ask my neighbor (an AF recruiter) to provide me with the contract.


The current military is over extended, yes. But you have to look at the reasons it came to be over extended. 8 years of Clinton downsizing didn't help matters much. I don't think that you can blame Bush for the entire problem.


Always the answer for Bush backers, to blame Clinton. It certainly did not make sense to keep such a large force with the destruction of the Soviet threat. Downsizing was actually begun in the late stages of the Bush Sr administration and the plans were implemented during the Clinton administration. Additionally, Bush has said that we have enough troops in the usual election year promises that he will not be able to keep.

My mistake, stop loss, but its been seven years since I've been in. Citizen Grim Xiozan was correct in stating the program is meant to keep key MOS up to strength. It was certainly never meant to be used by the military to force people to stay beyond what they've agreed except under unusual circumstances. But now its being used to extort soldiers to reenlist in order to get out of Iraq.

We are going to continue this same pattern for the next four years as Bush does not have a strategy that is going to allow the United States to leave Iraq anytime soon.What happens if another conflict comes about, or we need those soldiers to track down Al Quaida?
Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top
That contract does not cover active duty soldiers who are unable to leave the service after they put in their time.


Did you read it? They are not finished when they have "put in their time" -- it's in the contract. It's the full war + 6 months. I agree that it sucks, and I don't like it, but it is in the contract.
Reply #42 from PolMach Forums Top
i agree w/ whoami bush sucks so bad hes the worst pres ever. did u ever stop to notice he's the only president ever to lose jobs, he attacked iraq, but we got attacked by afghanistan, none of the al queda people were from or in iraq, with the money he's spent on the war we could feed, clothe, and house all the homeless people in the world, he has increased the debt more than any other president ever, he hasn't vetod a single bill, he sent afghani people to go find osama instead of americans, he went to iraq to find weapons and there were none, so 1000 americans and evev more iraqis have died, and were still over there , and even after he announced mission accomplished, but we never really accomplished our mission, did we? and, he lost all those es. plus, what right do we have do invade iraq? and theres his idea that were the greatest country ever, well bush, ive got a message for you: resign, you f%&#ing @$$hole!
uncle sam
Reply #43 from PolMach Forums Top
evan trivett, when did people respect bush? people egged his limmo when he was going into the whitehouse on inaugoration day in 2000, he lost the popular vote in 2000, and only won because he "won" florida by 538 votes. only 538! (not counting all the people whos votes wer denied) and the iraq war is the most unpopular war ever. nice try. o, and its unpatriotic to say bad things about bush, well that makes perfect sense, and i suppose its unpatriotic not to vote for him too?
uncle sam
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
Every enlistee, with the exception of those that have prior military service incur an eight year statuatory military service obligation, MSO for short. This is served in various combinations of active duty time (ACDU) and Individual Ready Reserve time (IRR). The most common being a 4X4, 4 years Active Duty, 4 years IRR. National Guard and Reserve enlistments are similar in incurring an 8 year MSO, however they are commonly served as 6 X 2, 6 years actively drilling one weekend a month and 2 weeks annual active duty training, and the remaining 2 years in the IRR. This is for initial enlistments only. Reenlistments are for terms consistent with what the individual services set per their needs (minimum and maximum reenlistment terms), but will always include at a minimum the remaining IRR MSO. If I enlist for a 4 X 4, serve my 4 ACDU, then reenlist for 2 more years ACDU, I will have 2 years remaining in the IRR for a total of 8 years (MSO).
The "War Clause" in the enlistment contract is not new. It's been in use since before the Civil War under different names. And for the retirees out there. The retirement pension is not like a civilian retirement pension. First it can be repealed by Congress at any time and cease to exist (not likely, it would be political suicide). Secondly, it is technically "Retainer Pay". In other words you can be called back to Active Duty, again for the duration per the "War Clause". It happened in WW II, Korea, and to a lesser extent in Vietnam.
Hope I didn't confuse you all. I was an Army MEPS (Military Entrance Processing Station) Guidance Counselor up until I retired last year. I concur with the above explanation of "Stop Loss". I was almost caught in it last year. I missed it by 2 months.
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
Did you read it? They are not finished when they have "put in their time" -- it's in the contract. It's the full war + 6 months. I agree that it sucks, and I don't like it, but it is in the contract.


Wow! This is interesting. I do stand corrected. Thanks for the info.

Additionally its been more than a year after Bush formally declared the war over.


and, this is certainly a mind-boggling point. Does Bush know this?
Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
It's not a backdoor draft. They signed knowing full well it could happen to them, I signed knowing full well stop loss can happen to me. It happened to me. Wait a sec........... awwww, I almost shed a tear, but it went away.

Anyone who claims they didn't know this extremely well explained obligation, is full of what's brown and makes the grass grow green. It sucks, but I'm not about to bitch and whine that it's illegal or illicit in any way. Besides, I much prefer this situation to the idea of a non-volunteer army or having started something in these countries, backing out to let them fall apart to shit like we did in vietnam, just because it inconveniences me for a year or two.
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
He's making $200,000 a year from the job of presidency, and a few more million from the oil war we are in since he is president.
Reply #48 from PolMach Forums Top
"and a few more million from the oil war we are in since he is president."


funny, i thought we were fighting in Fallujah
Reply #49 from PolMach Forums Top
by the way do ANY of YOU have ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER that President Bush is making money of OIL???? I don't want speculations I WANT PROOF. which none of you have. and its funny how you all say that Iraq is for oil when John Kerry aka "your hero" said that if anybody who didn't think Saddam was a threat doesn't deserve to be commander in chief . so what candidate do you think should have one.
Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top
I was an Army MEPS (Military Entrance Processing Station) Guidance Counselor up until I retired last year.


You bastard!

*only kidding, Nadeon*