So where is the Pentagon bashing? Where is the outrage toward them? What’s with the excuse finding?
What do you want from me? I have explicitly stated that if the government has reneged on a promise in writing, Senator Murray has a case that ought to be pursued.
That does not mean that the program is immune from changes in the future, does it?
Who is finding excuses? Everyone here has agreed that it’s deceptive and manipulative. Everyone here has agreed that if it turns out these troops were promised bonuses in writing when they re-upped, they should receive them. Several veterans taking the time to explain how service extensions and bonuses work to you doesn’t make them excuses. It’s the way they work. And we’re not outraged because we recognize that we probably aren’t seeing the entire story here. Military pay issues are more confusing than a West Virginia family tree.
All of this saying “but they only lied a little bit.” It’s not actionable. As if anything the military does to it’s soldiers is actionable. Making excuses.
Lying military recruiters seems to be something of a tradition in Western civilization. They probably consider themselves humane because the are not conscripting, which is what they would otherwise do. Sure its reprehensible, but it does tend to reinforce the public’s perception that the government cannot tell the truth.
It isn’t excuses! It’s called reading comprehension!! Was the clause in their re-enlistment/extension contract or not? Yes? PAY them. No? Then they don’t get it. It’s that simple. It isn’t up to the military to read the contract to the servicemembers. Just like out in the civillian world, it’s up to them to read it and decide if it’s something they agree to and are willing to commit to. If the clause isn’t there they have a couple options.
- Sign it
- Don’t sign it, ask for a correction, then sign.
- Don’t sign it, walk away.
No one is holding a gun to their heads. Have you never heard the expression “Don’t sign anything you haven’t read”? If not, then I see a lot of disappointments in your future.
Look, I think they deserve every single penny they can get. But let’s be honest. We’re coming up on an election year. Every congressperson with two brain cells to rub together can figure out the best way to get re-elected is to find a cause, make a huge issue out of it, get people all worked up, and promise to fix it. Do you honestly believe Senator Murray is doing this out of the goodness of her heart and a love of our troops? GIMME A FUCKIN BREAK. This has been happening forever. And really, it isn’t that big of a deal. There’s an obvious solution.
Well, they’re not fucking paying them! That’s the goddamned point! The National Guardsmen who were promised this money ARE NOT GETTING IT. The program has been cancelled. They are so upset about not getting what they were promised that they have complained to Congress.
What part of this am I not understanding. They were told that if they re-inlisted they would get this money. They did not get this money. And the apologist can only say this is buisness as usual. Well, to hell with that.
They signed again with the understanding that they would get $15,000. They did not get it. When the complained they were told the program was cancelled. What weasle words is it in all the excuse making am I not understanding?
Where? Where were they promised this? Verbally? Yeah, that means a whole fucking lot. Have you read the contract? No? Didn’t think so. Did they? Probably not! If they did, they would’ve seen that the clause probably wasn’t there! How bout that? Amazing how that works, huh?
Take the hands off the ears and stop screaming “lalalalalalalala!!!” One more time, in words as easy to under-stand as I can make them:
Bo-nus must be guar-an-teed in con-tract. No clause, no bo-nus. See? Ver-bal not good e-nough. “But, they prooooooooooooooomised!” don’t cut it, babe. Who promised? When? Why, oh, WHY would anyone sign something that includes risking their lives on a daily basis without fucking reading it?
And god DAMN you for fucking putting me on the same fucking side of an argument as Mr. Moto! Do you know how often we agree? NEVER! Dammit.
You mean oral, not verbal. Verbal is oral and written. And since when in a real court of law is an oral contract not enforceable? Despite all the mocking of Sam Goldwyn, if you make someone an oral promise for them to do something, you must fulfill your end of it. Are you under the impression that you may make promises orally that you never intend to keep (or later change your mind about) as long as it is written that that the contract is the whole thing? I’m in procurement, and the integration clause you might be thinking about does not protect you against promises made that you never intend to keep. That’s called fraud. My lawyers have told me that suppliers that say one thing and do another can be sued in civil court for civil fraud and if the district attorney wants to, in criminal court for larceny or whatever they call it.
According to the freaking Department of Defense there was a program. They were paying the soldiers in this program. And then they stopped. BECAUSE THEY CANCELLED THE FREAKING PROGRAM. Not because the i wasn’t dotted or the t wasn’t crossed.
And again-- it doesn’t matter if the servicemen signed a contract. They probably did. But since this is the military and they are in the military-- IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE HONORED. That’s right. The military can break any fucking contract it wants and apparently does all the freaking time because nobody gives a fuck.
Don’t blame me if you’re on the side of evil.
See-
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.
Whoa Biggirl, you say that as if evil were a bad thing. It’s not, it’s the new good. It’s double plus good to renege on a promise to a soldier who might die and it’s quadruple plus good if he leaves a wife and baby, as long as he signs up and doesn’t get money destined for war profiteers. This war has been great for Halliburton and Bechtel stockholders, and that’s no double plus lie.
What Maureen said. In this context, the word, “promised” is defined as “guaranteed in writing in the contract.” IOW, no, they were not “promised” the money.
If it develops that the people mentioned in the story did have the guarantee written in their contracts, then the above paragraph will be rendered inoperative. The trouble is, we have not yet been presented with enough information to determine whether that is the case.
It does seem somewhat odd that somebody, somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon, formulated a bonus program that was allowed to become enough of a reality that, not only were retention workers profferring it as an incentive, but some personnel appear to have actually received the bonus, before someone noticed that it didn’t meet the requirements for a legal program. I think Senator Murray is right to demand a full explanation for how matters reached this state, and I hope that she persists in her demands until the information is made public.
Holy shit. You really are literally about to bust a blood vessel, aren’t you? I’m getting a mental image of someone standing in front of their monitor, red faced and screeching.
Look. I get that you have the same understanding of the inner workings of the military as a damp sponge. That’s no excuse to ask for edification and then keep repeating the same tired crap when said edification is provided.
Hm. So, they’re going to get bonuses. Just not the $15K ones, because they were promised others. Sorry that’s not clear to you.
So, we don’t have enough information from that one article to really make an informed opinion. Oh, well, this is the Pit. Informed opinions not required.
Once again, reinforcing that the service members in question were going to receive bonuses, just not the new bonus of $15K.
Several people have tried to explain to you why what you are railing against may have happened. The fact is, the article you cited in your OP doesn’t have the full story of exactly what happened, and you haven’t provided any other cites providing any other information.
Oh, and BobLoblaw, IIRC, civil law doesn’t apply to the military. Or for that matter, to the U.S. government. You may want to check with your attornies, though.
I understand more than you think. Let’s start again.
If you are in the military you cannot sue the military. The military can (and has) break any contract that they wish and there is little a service person can do about it. That means that the only guarantee that you can get with the military is their own word. Which is shit. Because they lie. They lie and lie and the apologist can only say, “Well, they didn’t sign on the dotted line” even though there is no proof that they didn’t.
So now the military gave their word that some National Guardsmen would get a $15,000 bonus if they re-inlisted. Was there a signed agreement? Does it matter if there was a signed agreement? Because whether or not it still only the military’s honor that will make good on this promise. And the military has no honor. And you civilian apologists make it sooo easy for them to go back on their word.
Now the military is saying that maybe, it could be, possibly, perhaps these servicemen will get some money from some other program somehow. That they didn’t sign for, so good luck collecting on that.
And yeah, I’m screeching. Fuckin’ right. These guys have been shafted and all you can do is look for loopholes. But it doesn’t matter what they were promised. The military is a bunch of liars and you should just be happy about it. Haha, imagine taking them at their word. Boy, Biggirl, you sure are stupid thinking the military should be held to some sort of standard of truth and decency.
Yeah, when are the idiots who criticize our great government going to realize that you can orally say whatever you want, but what is in writing is what counts. You can lie all you want when selling, and should, but only what is in writing counts. It’s the recruiter’s right to lie, lie, lie and then get them to sign on the dotted line. Lies are what made this country great and lying to people to get them to give you money and then taking their money and their lives is the way it works. If you ain’t got it in writing, you ain’t got jack. Bob Loblaw
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.
You’re not stupid for thinking that. You’re just stupid in general.
Because I am not apologizing for the military, as anyone with a bit of sense would notice. I am merely saying that this whole bonus and pay issue is a complex one. Far more complex than alluded to in that useless article full of half-reported information, and far more complex than you seem willing to devote the time to do a little reading about.
The military does not get paid like normal people do. There is a vast bureaucracy in place to help not only military members but the government itself make some sense of their labyrinthine structure of regular pay, sea pay, deployment pay, pay for special skills, tax free pay, taxable pay, allowances for subsistence, allowances for housing, allowances for uniforms, applicable per diems, and bonuses.
Sorry. My reply was, obviously, intended for Biggirl.