# In the government, we support the troops --- by lying to them. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 19, 2005, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927 "2005-10-19T16:29:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![stretch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a6a055/32.png) [@stretch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stretch)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/81 "2005-10-21T18:55:47Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Look, every single member of Congress has a staffer that specializes in DoD and veteran’s affairs constituent affairs. If this were a simple matter of an individual or a group with a problem with the bureaucracy, the staffer would contact the office in the Pentagon dedicated to handling legislative inquiries, and the whole thing would be answered pretty quickly. > > That’s not what is happening here, though. This is getting hashed out in the papers. > > Now, someone could charitably assume this means that Senator Murray wants to bring the issue of military bonuses to greater exposure, so these problems may be addressed through legislation. I’ll be looking for her efforts to reform this system, and I do hope they go beyond mere rhetoric. Somebody who was interested in the affairs of the military and veterans would certainly be aware that Senator Murray (D-WA)\* is known for her interest in matters that involve these groups. There is a reason that NG, reserve, veterans and active duty military contact this senator about these issues–she is known for fighting to get them what they were promised and what they deserve. Someday, **Mr. Moto** , you may be in a position to thank the citizens of the State of Washington for electing Senator Murray. She went through channels to try to find out what was happening and is still awaiting an adequate response. In the meantime, the media is doing its job of reporting what our legislators are doing with their time. Seems like this is being done exactly the way it should be. \*Of course, she is a Democrat and therefore must hate the military. Not sure how we can resolve this obvious discrepancy. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/82 "2005-10-21T19:37:10Z")
And yet (and I’m speaking as a Murray voter and a member of a deeply military family) Senator Murray has not made much headway in garnering support for real reform within the Pentagon. Further, it’s pretty damned obvious that she is interested in pursuing this particular bureaucratic snafu in an effort to hold the Bush administration’s feet to the fire. Believe it or not, it is possible to score political points and do the right thing at the same time, and Senator Murray is very good at it. ---
**Author:** ![stretch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a6a055/32.png) [@stretch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stretch)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/83 "2005-10-21T21:13:04Z")
> [@andros](#): > > And yet (and I’m speaking as a Murray voter and a member of a deeply military family) Senator Murray has not made much headway in garnering support for real reform within the Pentagon. > > Further, it’s pretty damned obvious that she is interested in pursuing this particular bureaucratic snafu in an effort to hold the Bush administration’s feet to the fire. Believe it or not, it is possible to score political points and do the right thing at the same time, and Senator Murray is very good at it. I agree that it’s possible to both score political points and do the right thing at the same time, and that Murray is good at it. Do you disagree that the military needs representation? That Murray provides this representation frequently enough that it’s reported in local (Washington State) news as a matter of course? Crap, even people over here who hate those damn liberals recognize what Murray does for the military as a whole and veterans in particular–it’s one of her main schticks. Also, it’s her fucking job to represent her constiuency, of which I’m a member despite my location in this bastion of conservatism. Re-reading the article, I’m pissed that the paper listed her as D-Seattle–when did she start repping only those elitist fuckers?! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/84 "2005-10-21T21:28:45Z")
> [@Maureen](#): > > Baaaaaahahahahahahahaahahaaaaaaaaaaa!!! > > **Bob** , both **kaylasdad99** and I criticize the government in general and this administration in particular in this forum on a regular basis. But nice try. Also, " If you ain’t got it in writing, you ain’t got jack" is pretty standard with corporations, not just the US Government or the military. I’d expect a successful businessman to know that. That was very kind of you, **Maureen** , recognizing my posting history like that. ‘Cause it really gets annoying, having to produce my own credentials, any time I want to be recognized as a genuine irrational Bush-bashin’ America-hatin’ lib’rul. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/85 "2005-10-21T21:46:29Z")
> [@stretch](#): > > Do you disagree that the military needs representation? That Murray provides this representation frequently enough that it’s reported in local (Washington State) news as a matter of course? Crap, even people over here who hate those damn liberals recognize what Murray does for the military as a whole and veterans in particular–it’s one of her main schticks. Sure. Alls I’m saying is that **Moto** might be unaware of Patty’s history of going to the mat for soldiers, but he has a point–if this were simply a bureaucratic fuckup, it would be a minor matter. But Patty wants it in the papers, and her history notwithstanding I don’t find it unreasonable to feel some concern that a politician might not be 100% entirely without guile or ulterior motivation. Bear in mind he didn’t accuse her of deception. > [@](#): > > Also, it’s her fucking job to represent her constiuency, of which I’m a member despite my location in this bastion of conservatism. Re-reading the article, I’m pissed that the paper listed her as D-Seattle–when did she start repping only those elitist fuckers?! 😉 Oh, boo fucking hoo, Mr. _Central_ Washington. I bet you can see mountains from where you are, and that makes you one of them gawdamn Westsiders in my book. 😃 (E’burg? CWU?) ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Loblaw_1)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/86 "2005-10-21T21:54:37Z")
> [@Maureen](#): > > Baaaaaahahahahahahahaahahaaaaaaaaaaa!!! > > **Bob** , both **kaylasdad99** and I criticize the government in general and this administration in particular in this forum on a regular basis. But nice try. Also, " If you ain’t got it in writing, you ain’t got jack" is pretty standard with corporations, not just the US Government or the military. I’d expect a successful businessman to know that. It may be pretty standard, but it is not the law and not ethical, which I think is Biggirl’s point. Is it the way of the world? I suppose so, but it is still fraud, and worthy of denunciation, whether done by the government, a corporation or a two bit hustler. As for it being a complex issue, as a number of posters have suggested: no it isn’t, it’s bait and switch. All the guardsmen have to do is find themselves a good lawyer. (Yes, I know, that is easier said than done.) ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/87 "2005-10-21T21:56:38Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > That was very kind of you, **Maureen** , recognizing my posting history like that. > > ‘Cause it really gets annoying, having to produce my own credentials, any time I want to be recognized as a genuine irrational Bush-bashin’ America-hatin’ lib’rul. Not necessary. Didn’t you notice? All us Gen-u-Wine ‘Murika hatin’ commies have a special little tinfoil hat icon next to our user names that the _c-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-v-e-s_ and non-paying guests can’t see. Sh. Don’t tell, the administration doesn’t want it known that this board leans to the left. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/88 "2005-10-21T22:50:38Z")
> [@Bob Loblaw](#): > > It may be pretty standard, but it is not the law and not ethical, which I think is Biggirl’s point. Is it the way of the world? I suppose so, but it is still fraud, and worthy of denunciation, whether done by the government, a corporation or a two bit hustler. At the risk of being castigated for talking gibberish to **Bob Loblaw** , I’d like to ask you to not use the word “fraud” so casually. > [@Bob Loblaw](#): > > As for it being a complex issue, as a number of posters have suggested: no it isn’t, it’s bait and switch. All the guardsmen have to do is find themselves a good lawyer. (Yes, I know, that is easier said than done.) I agree that it appears to be a bait and switch situation, but since we don’t know the genesis of the aborted bonus program, the specific parts that conflicted with pre-existing rules, or whether it would have been possible to modify the program to bring it into compliance, yes it _is_ a complex issue. Once these details have been clarified, the complexity can be lessened. You know, the Pentagon is still going to be there after Senator Murray has gotten all of the information. Until that happens, I think it’s a bit premature to characterize it as the Pentagon “reneging” on anything. But maintaining a high noise-to-signal ratio, as it were, consisting primarily of inchoate rage against the skinflints in the Pentagon, strikes me as something that is more likely to draw attention **away** from the search for the facts, than to bring about its successful conclusion. ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Loblaw_1)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/89 "2005-10-21T23:13:15Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > At the risk of being castigated for talking gibberish to **Bob Loblaw** , I’d like to ask you to not use the word “fraud” so casually.I agree that it appears to be a bait and switch situation, but since we don’t know the genesis of the aborted bonus program, the specific parts that conflicted with pre-existing rules, or whether it would have been possible to modify the program to bring it into compliance, yes it _is_ a complex issue. Once these details have been clarified, the complexity can be lessened. > > You know, the Pentagon is still going to be there after Senator Murray has gotten all of the information. Until that happens, I think it’s a bit premature to characterize it as the Pentagon “reneging” on anything. But maintaining a high noise-to-signal ratio, as it were, consisting primarily of inchoate rage against the skinflints in the Pentagon, strikes me as something that is more likely to draw attention **away** from the search for the facts, than to bring about its successful conclusion. I agree fully that we should not offer any critcism of any program, government or otherwise, or any scheme, even if offered by people accused of being a con-man, until all the facts are in, and in no case should we show rage about anything as that is just impolite and likely to frighten small children and animals. The fact that in the meantime recruiters are still screwing soldiers and there isn’t the slightest evidence to the contrary does not justify criticism so loud that it might interfere with the complete of the screwing before the blue ribbon panel gets done with its leisurely review of the official version of the facts that Mr. Rumsfeld deigns to provide, should he deem that appropriate. It is the height of irresponsibility to take a side that has an unofficial version of the government’s monopoly of the facts, much less with a 'tude, before the government has told us what our universe of facts are. Indeed, if we had followed the advice of people like Biggirl prior to the late festivities of the US armed services in Iraq, we would have discovered, before we invaded, that every single justification for the Iraq war was an outright lie except that Saddam Hussein was a murdering son of a bitch,which everyone, including him conceded. But I suppose that I should back off the use of the word “lie” because I can only prove that every fact that the administration relied on was objectively untrue, known to be objective untrue at the time it was issued, but still might have been sincerely believed by the people uttering the untruths because they believed them to be true in spite of the facts, which they discounted 100 percent. Well, recruiters have been lying for centuries, and people have been getting pissed off about it for centuries, and what right don’t people like Biggirl have to get mad about it? Because it offends you? It puts you off your kibbel? That you have a right not to be offended by the emotional intensity of her opinions? That you have a right to say so? (Which you clearly do.) That doesn’t mean your opinion isn’t a pile of the stuff which emerges from the east end of a west facing horse, it is. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2005, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/90 "2005-10-21T23:38:13Z")
I guess gibberish _to_ **Bob Loblaw** is the least of anyone’s worries. :rolleyes: Dude, go register Republican and be on somebody else’s side, for a change. you’re embarrassing us. ---
**Author:** ![stretch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a6a055/32.png) [@stretch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stretch)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2005, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/91 "2005-10-22T00:24:26Z")
> [@andros](#): > > Sure. Alls I’m saying is that **Moto** might be unaware of Patty’s history of going to the mat for soldiers, but he has a point–if this were simply a bureaucratic fuckup, it would be a minor matter. But Patty wants it in the papers, and her history notwithstanding I don’t find it unreasonable to feel some concern that a politician might not be 100% entirely without guile or ulterior motivation. Bear in mind he didn’t accuse her of deception. > Oh, boo fucking hoo, Mr. _Central_ Washington. I bet you can see mountains from where you are, and that makes you one of them gawdamn Westsiders in my book. 😃 (E’burg? CWU?) Fine, be all reasonable, see if I care! And that’s _Ms._ Central Washington to you, sparky. Selah, to be exact (barely north of Yakima, south of E’burg). If I can get to high ground, I can see Mt. Adams–I guess that counts! And compared to you, I suppose I’m practically on the coast. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2005, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/92 "2005-10-22T00:32:05Z")
> [@stretch](#): > > And that’s _Ms._ Central Washington to you, sparky. Stand corrected, ma’am. > [@](#): > > And compared to you, I suppose I’m practically on the coast. 😉 Not all that bad. Tri-Cities. ---
**Author:** ![stretch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a6a055/32.png) [@stretch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stretch)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2005, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/93 "2005-10-22T00:37:40Z")
> [@andros](#): > > Stand corrected, ma’am. > Not all that bad. Tri-Cities. ::shudder:: Too many people there for me, though we do go up occasionally to look for tropical fish. /hijack ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Loblaw_1)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2005, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/94 "2005-10-22T03:27:20Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > I guess gibberish _to_ **Bob Loblaw** is the least of anyone’s worries. > > :rolleyes: > > Dude, go register Republican and be on somebody else’s side, for a change. you’re embarrassing us. That’s the problem, you embarass far to easily at the doings of others and keep your head low on the chance that someone else may embarass you, when in fact the goverment is taking unfair advantage of people who want to avoid a scene. Only you can embarass yourself. Don’t go through life without making a scene when necessary, and don’t rain on someone else’s scene making, namely Biggirl’s. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2005, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/95 "2005-10-22T04:23:38Z")
> [@](#): > > **Maureen** : Look, I think they deserve every single penny they can get. But let’s be honest. You should have quit while you were ahead. That was the whole point of **Bigirl’s** thread. > [@](#): > > Once again, reinforcing that the service members in question were going to receive bonuses, just not the new bonus of $15K. \*\*Maureen, notice what is actually said: > [@](#): > > "Under that plan, reservists CAN receive UP TO $7,500 for a three-year re-enlistment, or $15,000 for a six-year service extension. Since being able to understand\*\* a contract is important to the person signing, YOU should be able to understand the following: 1. “Can” does not mean the same thing as “will.” Therefore, the statement is NOT saying that a reservist WILL receive a bonus. I can give you $500. I CAN. But I won’t. I am willing to PUT IT IN WRITING in a contract that I can give you $500! 1. “Up to” $15,000 is not the same as $15,000! In fact, ZERO DOLLARS falls in the category of “up to” $15,000! So under the plan, reservists **may** receive absolutelybloomingfucking **NOTHING** of the original $15,000. The “plan” as described is not worth _anything_. > [@](#): > > **Maureen** : Why, oh, WHY would anyone sign something that includes risking their lives on a daily basis without fucking reading it? Why, oh, WHY would any government make an explanation so deceptive that an intelligent person such as yourself – cannot understand the implications? What difference does it make if you can **read** it but the language is so tricky that the best and the brightest _still_ misinterprete and put their lives on the line because of this? Your government is fucking with your buddies’ lives, **Maureen**. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2005, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/96 "2005-10-22T19:41:10Z")
Nice. Cherry picking posts for fun and profit. Way to take several sentences out of context, **Zoe**. You, too, could have a wonderful journalism career working for the Enquirer. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2005, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/97 "2005-10-22T21:32:25Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > 1. “Can” does not mean the same thing as “will.” Therefore, the statement is NOT saying that a reservist WILL receive a bonus. > > I can give you $500. I CAN. But I won’t. I am willing to PUT IT IN WRITING in a contract that I can give you $500! > > 1. “Up to” $15,000 is not the same as $15,000! In fact, ZERO DOLLARS falls in the category of “up to” $15,000! > > So under the plan, reservists **may** receive absolutelybloomingfucking **NOTHING** of the original $15,000. The “plan” as described is not worth _anything_. > > Why, oh, WHY would any government make an explanation so deceptive that an intelligent person such as yourself – cannot understand the implications? What difference does it make if you can **read** it but the language is so tricky that the best and the brightest _still_ misinterprete and put their lives on the line because of this? > > Your government is fucking with your buddies’ lives, **Maureen**. We still haven’t nailed down a couple of key issues here. 1)What were the qualifications for the $15k bonus that was taken away? It seems unlikely that it would be any different from any other military bonus, but we just don’t know. 2)What are the qualifications for the surviving “up to $15k” bonus? What are the disqualifications? 3)WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALT!! Right now all we are doing is arguing on different views of possible facts. How about we nail down some specifics for those of us still wondering if this is worth the outrage? ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2005, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/98 "2005-10-24T01:34:08Z")
Are you nuts, **Harborwolf**? Preferring to know precisely what we’re getting our dander up for? Declining to be goaded into leading with our chins? You ought to be ashamed of yourself. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2005, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927/99 "2005-10-24T02:46:48Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Are you nuts, **Harborwolf**? Preferring to know precisely what we’re getting our dander up for? Declining to be goaded into leading with our chins? > > You ought to be ashamed of yourself. :dubious: I know. And to think I dare call myself a doper. I’ll slink away now. ☹ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-government-we-support-the-troops-by-lying-to-them/326927.md?page=4)