US troops committing suicide

[ngeso]

US troops question presence in Iraq

Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Friday October 17, 2003
The Guardian

A sizeable portion of US forces serving in Iraq describe troop morale as low, and say they have no intention of re-enlisting, damaging the campaign by the US government to brighten up the image of the postwar occupation.
The survey of 1,935 troops, published in a series of special reports on Iraq in the Stars and Stripes newspaper, also found that a significant number of troops were confused about the purpose of their presence, and had lost faith in their mission.

Coinciding with the report, the army yesterday admitted that at least 13 US troops had committed suicide in Iraq, representing more than 10% of American non-combat deaths there, and said the army had sent a suicide-prevention expert to Iraq.

Stars and Stripes, which is funded by the Pentagon, says it embarked on the project after receiving scores of letters from disenchanted servicemen.

The mailbags belied claims last week by President Bush that increasingly negative public perceptions of Iraq were a product of media spin, and that those who had been there held different views. Not so those for serving up to 12 months in Iraq, according to Stars and Strips, which noted that the troops' views stood in sharp contrast to those of senior officials on brief visits to Iraq.

Yesterday the newspaper quoted an unidentified master sergeant as saying that the delegations of officers and Congressmen only met small groups of specially selected soldiers. "They stacked the deck," he says.

Instead, 49% of those who answered the newspaper's questionnaire rated the morale of their unit as low or very low, 49% said it was unlikely they would re-enlist, and 31% said they thought the war had not been worthwhile.

Stars and Stripes noted that soldiers who were open about morale problems had at times faces disciplinary action. Although the malaise appears to be linked to uncertainty about the length of tours of duty in Iraq, pay scales, and conditions on the ground, another significant factor appears to be the meaning of their mission. Stars and Strips said 35% of respondents complained their mission was not clearly defined. It quotes a member of the National Guard as saying: "We're in the dark."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1064993,00.html

[U]

Does this really surprise you?

[JoeB]

graemlins/jpshakehead.gif

[Brut by Faberge]

Originally posted by JoeB:
graemlins/jpshakehead.gif second that, JoeB. What else can you say?

[Cheddar]

I wouldnt be too happy over there either.
Holy War has begun. (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1016-01.htm)

Published on Thursday, October 16, 2003 by the Los Angeles Times
General Casts War in Religious Terms
The top soldier assigned to track down Bin Laden and Hussein is an evangelical Christian who speaks publicly of 'the army of God.'

by Richard T. Cooper

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has assigned the task of tracking down and eliminating Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and other high-profile targets to an Army general who sees the war on terrorism as a clash between Judeo-Christian values and Satan.

Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin, the new deputy undersecretary of Defense for intelligence, is a much-decorated and twice-wounded veteran of covert military operations. From the bloody 1993 clash with Muslim warlords in Somalia chronicled in "Black Hawk Down" and the hunt for Colombian drug czar Pablo Escobar to the ill-fated attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran in 1980, Boykin was in the thick of things.


William G. "Jerry" Boykin


I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.

Lt. Gen. William G. ‘Jerry’ Boykin, speaking about battle with a Muslim warlord

Yet the former commander and 13-year veteran of the Army's top-secret Delta Force is also an outspoken evangelical Christian who appeared in dress uniform and polished jump boots before a religious group in Oregon in June to declare that radical Islamists hated the United States "because we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christian ... and the enemy is a guy named Satan."

Discussing the battle against a Muslim warlord in Somalia, Boykin told another audience, "I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol."

"We in the army of God, in the house of God, kingdom of God have been raised for such a time as this," Boykin said last year.

On at least one occasion, in Sandy, Ore., in June, Boykin said of President Bush: "He's in the White House because God put him there."

Boykin's penchant for casting the war on terrorism in religious terms appears to be at odds with Bush and an administration that have labored to insist that the war on terrorism is not a religious conflict.

Although the Army has seldom if ever taken official action against officers for outspoken expressions of religious opinion, outside experts see remarks such as Boykin's as sending exactly the wrong message to the Arab and Islamic world.

In his public remarks, Boykin has also said that radical Muslims who resort to terrorism are not representative of the Islamic faith.

He has compared Islamic extremists to "hooded Christians" who terrorized blacks, Catholics, Jews and others from beneath the robes of the Ku Klux Klan.

Boykin was not available for comment and did not respond to written questions from the Los Angeles Times submitted to him Wednesday.

"The first lesson is to recognize that whatever we say here is heard there, particularly anything perceived to be hostile to their basic religion, and they don't forget it," said Stephen P. Cohen, a member of the special panel named to study policy in the Arab and Muslim world for the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy.

"The phrase 'Judeo-Christian' is a big mistake. It's basically the language of Bin Laden and his supporters," said Cohen, president of the Institute for Middle East Peace and Development in New York.

"They are constantly trying to create the impression that the Jews and Christians are getting together to beat up on Islam.... We have to be very careful that this doesn't become a clash between religions, a clash of civilizations."

Boykin's religious activities were first documented in detail by William N. Arkin, a former military intelligence analyst who writes on defense issues for The Times Opinion section.

Audio and videotapes of Boykin's appearances before religious groups over the last two years were obtained exclusively by NBC News, which reported on them Wednesday night on the "Nightly News with Tom Brokaw."

Arkin writes in an article on the op-ed page of today's Times that Boykin's appointment "is a frightening blunder at a time that there is widespread acknowledgment that America's position in the Islamic world has never been worse."

Boykin's promotion to lieutenant general and his appointment as deputy undersecretary of Defense for intelligence were confirmed by the Senate by voice vote in June.

An aide to the Senate Armed Services Committee said the appointment was not examined in detail.

Yet Boykin's explicitly Christian-evangelical language in public forums may become an issue now that he holds a high-level policy position in the Pentagon.

Officials at his level are often called upon to testify before Congress and appear in public forums.

Boykin's new job makes his role especially sensitive: He is charged with speeding up the flow of intelligence on terrorist leaders to combat teams in the field so that they can attack top-ranking terrorist leaders.

Since virtually all these leaders are Muslim, Boykin's words and actions are likely to draw special scrutiny in the Arab and Islamic world.

Bush, a born-again Christian, often uses religious language in his speeches, but he keeps references to God nonsectarian.

At one point, immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the president said he wanted to lead a "crusade" against terrorism.

But he quickly retracted the word when told that, to Muslim ears, it recalled the medieval Christian crusaders' brutal invasions of Islamic nations.

In that context, Boykin's reference to the God of Islam as "an idol" may be perceived as particularly inflammatory.

The president has made a point of praising Islam as "a religion of peace." He has invited Muslim clerics to the White House for Ramadan dinners and has criticized evangelicals who called Islam a dangerous faith.

The issue is still a sore spot in the Muslim world.

Pollster John Zogby says that public opinion surveys throughout the Arab and Islamic world show strong negative reactions to any statement by a U.S. official that suggests a conflict between religions or cultures.

"To frame things in terms of good and evil, with the United States as good, is a nonstarter," Zogby said.

"It is exactly the wrong thing to do."

For the Army, the issue of officers expressing religious opinions publicly has been a sensitive problem for many years, according to a former head of the Army Judge Advocate General's office who is now retired but continues to serve in government as a civilian.

"The Army has struggled with this issue over the years. It gets really, really touchy because what you're talking about is freedom of expression," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"What usually happens is that somebody has a quiet chat with the person," the retired general said.

Times staff writer Doyle McManus contributed to this report.

[LEONARD REMIX RROY]

It is not an easy thing to explain but, between Dolemite73 & myself, maybe we can shead some light on the subject.

Life of a combat military men is a hard life that goes un-understood to many who have not lived it. There are many reasons that we get into a "Have No Reason To Live" mode.

Most are to do with the spouse. The term "while the cats away the mouse will play" runs ramped in the military, especially in rapid deployment units IE: ready at a moments notice to go to war.

Combat members tend to be lonely and only want a piece of heaven on earth and they tend to find that in a woman. The wife is the only good thread in a lifestyle of a trained killer for the lack of a softer term, and our belief is "Kill Em All & Let GOD Sort Em Out!!!"

Look at that mentality, then have the only good thing in that mans life "break bad" IE: cheat on them. That takes the life right out of them. This may sound strange but, it is not the physical act of another man with the wife that pust a person over the edge, it is the trust that is broken.

We know that our squad is willing to die for each-other and we will also insure that the family of a fallen squad member will recieve 100% of support from the remaining squad members if needed "when you marry that soldier - in a way you married that squad" because we leave no man behind.

When you take that into consideration "broken trust" a soldier will turn on himself.

The single soldier is different because the desire to have that slice of heaven keep them going unless some tramatic event occurs.

It is easier to see a potential "will harm self" squad member as of the married members, the single ones don't visibaly stand out as much...and it is sometimes hard to see the forest for the trees.

I had a platoon member that killed himself in 1997. After a falling out with the wife, he was instructed to move into the barraks. Innitially he was cool and getting his man on with the fellas. While in "Bro's before hoes mode" everything was all good. He went by their place to talk to her on evening and she was upstairs banging away with another soldier. He returned to the barraks, said nothing about the siutation, got a pre-New Years Eve drunk on - then drove uphill in the wrong lane and hit an 18 wheel truck head on about 3 miles off base.

As for that woman - she married the dude before (I won't use his name) body was cold, I am talking soon as she recieven the death certificate! She then brought dude to his funeral, and picked up the SGLI (insurance money)...If I had a million bucks - I would pay that to see the look on her face when she saw $70,000 and not a $200,000 check. She did not recieve the whole ammount becaust it was an alcohal related incident + he wore no seatbelt.

I didn't mean to go long like this but, this post hit's home for me.

[Dolemite73]

Originally posted by LEONARD REMIX RROY:
It is not an easy thing to explain but, between Dolemite73 & myself, maybe we can shead some light on the subject.

Life of a combat military men is a hard life that goes un-understood to many who have not lived it. There are many reasons that we get into a "Have No Reason To Live" mode.

Most are to do with the spouse. The term "while the cats away the mouse will play" runs ramped in the military, especially in rapid deployment units IE: ready at a moments notice to go to war.

Combat members tend to be lonely and only want a piece of heaven on earth and they tend to find that in a woman. The wife is the only good thread in a lifestyle of a trained killer for the lack of a softer term, and our belief is "Kill Em All & Let GOD Sort Em Out!!!"

Look at that mentality, then have the only good thing in that mans life "break bad" IE: cheat on them. That takes the life right out of them. This may sound strange but, it is not the physical act of another man with the wife that pust a person over the edge, it is the trust that is broken.

We know that our squad is willing to die for each-other and we will also insure that the family of a fallen squad member will recieve 100% of support from the remaining squad members if needed "when you marry that soldier - in a way you married that squad" because we leave no man behind.

When you take that into consideration "broken trust" a soldier will turn on himself.

The single soldier is different because the desire to have that slice of heaven keep them going unless some tramatic event occurs.

It is easier to see a potential "will harm self" squad member as of the married members, the single ones don't visibaly stand out as much...and it is sometimes hard to see the forest for the trees.

I had a platoon member that killed himself in 1997. After a falling out with the wife, he was instructed to move into the barraks. Innitially he was cool and getting his man on with the fellas. While in "Bro's before hoes mode" everything was all good. He went by their place to talk to her on evening and she was upstairs banging away with another soldier. He returned to the barraks, said nothing about the siutation, got a pre-New Years Eve drunk on - then drove uphill in the wrong lane and hit an 18 wheel truck head on about 3 miles off base.

As for that woman - she married the dude before (I won't use his name) body was cold, I am talking soon as she recieven the death certificate! She then brought dude to his funeral, and picked up the SGLI (insurance money)...If I had a million bucks - I would pay that to see the look on her face when she saw $70,000 and not a $200,000 check. She did not recieve the whole ammount becaust it was an alcohal related incident + he wore no seatbelt.

I didn't mean to go long like this but, this post hit's home for me. I am sorry I am so late in responding, but this is so true. I have had a couple of Marines I have worked with kill themselves, and each death was very preventable. The Marine Corps has always had a huge problem with suicides. Out of the other 4 Armed services, the Marines have the worse suicide rate. Part of it is definitely due to what Remix is talking about. The other part is people's insensitivities to other people problems. Those guys in Iraq are going through hell right now and they see things as hopeless. Its a crying goddamned shamed.

[ October 21, 2003, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: Dolemite73 ]

[AD]

The moral is so low right now within the armed forces that I don't see how the government will ever be able to encourage recruitment in the future amongst our young men and women. We NEED to get the hell out of there or this will be Vietnam part II. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif

[Dolemite73]

Originally posted by Albert Diaz:
The moral is so low right now within the armed forces that I don't see how the government will ever be able to encourage recruitment in the future amongst our young men and women. We NEED to get the hell out of there or this will be Vietnam part II. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif The draft will be coming to a town or city near you real soon. You heard it here first.

[The Buddy Love Show]

Originally posted by Dolemite73:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LEONARD REMIX RROY:
It is not an easy thing to explain but, between Dolemite73 & myself, maybe we can shead some light on the subject.

Life of a combat military men is a hard life that goes un-understood to many who have not lived it. There are many reasons that we get into a "Have No Reason To Live" mode.

Most are to do with the spouse. The term "while the cats away the mouse will play" runs ramped in the military, especially in rapid deployment units IE: ready at a moments notice to go to war.

Combat members tend to be lonely and only want a piece of heaven on earth and they tend to find that in a woman. The wife is the only good thread in a lifestyle of a trained killer for the lack of a softer term, and our belief is "Kill Em All & Let GOD Sort Em Out!!!"

Look at that mentality, then have the only good thing in that mans life "break bad" IE: cheat on them. That takes the life right out of them. This may sound strange but, it is not the physical act of another man with the wife that pust a person over the edge, it is the trust that is broken.

We know that our squad is willing to die for each-other and we will also insure that the family of a fallen squad member will recieve 100% of support from the remaining squad members if needed "when you marry that soldier - in a way you married that squad" because we leave no man behind.

When you take that into consideration "broken trust" a soldier will turn on himself.

The single soldier is different because the desire to have that slice of heaven keep them going unless some tramatic event occurs.

It is easier to see a potential "will harm self" squad member as of the married members, the single ones don't visibaly stand out as much...and it is sometimes hard to see the forest for the trees.

I had a platoon member that killed himself in 1997. After a falling out with the wife, he was instructed to move into the barraks. Innitially he was cool and getting his man on with the fellas. While in "Bro's before hoes mode" everything was all good. He went by their place to talk to her on evening and she was upstairs banging away with another soldier. He returned to the barraks, said nothing about the siutation, got a pre-New Years Eve drunk on - then drove uphill in the wrong lane and hit an 18 wheel truck head on about 3 miles off base.

As for that woman - she married the dude before (I won't use his name) body was cold, I am talking soon as she recieven the death certificate! She then brought dude to his funeral, and picked up the SGLI (insurance money)...If I had a million bucks - I would pay that to see the look on her face when she saw $70,000 and not a $200,000 check. She did not recieve the whole ammount becaust it was an alcohal related incident + he wore no seatbelt.

I didn't mean to go long like this but, this post hit's home for me. I am sorry I am so late in responding, but this is so true. I have had a couple of Marines I have worked with kill themselves, and each death was very preventable. The Marine Corps has always had a huge problem with suicides. Out of the other 4 Armed services, the Marines have the worse suicide rate. Part of it is definitely due to what Remix is talking about. The other part is people's insensitivities to other people problems. Those guys in Iraq are going through hell right now and they see things as hopeless. Its a crying goddamned shamed. </font>[/QUOTE]thanks for the insight...a truly terrible situation

[AD]

Originally posted by Dolemite73:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Albert Diaz:
The moral is so low right now within the armed forces that I don't see how the government will ever be able to encourage recruitment in the future amongst our young men and women. We NEED to get the hell out of there or this will be Vietnam part II. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif The draft will be coming to a town or city near you real soon. You heard it here first. </font>[/QUOTE]Somehow, I find that VERY believable. Mexico, here I come. graemlins/bolt.gif

[Leslie]

This just puts a chill up and down my spine. Dolemite and Remix, what if anything does the military do to try and prevent this or basically is it a consequence of war?

Charles Rangle has been advocating for the return of the draft.

[LEONARD REMIX RROY]

Originally posted by Leslie:
This just puts a chill up and down my spine. Dolemite and Remix, what if anything does the military do to try and prevent this or basically is it a consequence of war?

Charles Rangle has been advocating for the return of the draft. Prevention is - a good squad leader & team leaders! I was missed greatly when I had to leave my stateside duty station for an overseas tour. Had I still been stateside, I could had prevented (nameless soldier) from going that route.

What is a total shame is...promotions are very quick in the combat arms field, a person young as 22 could be a squadleader but - had no life / real world experience (s/p) due to the fact that they enlisted at 18 (really knew nothing as of serious problems) and at 22 years of age, still have none - other than military problems. In short, they cant help due to the fact that they don't know shit.

There are people who enlist at 18, retire at 38... with the impression that they will now be on easy street then....recieve the shock of their life after they re-enter the real world.

Some can't cope and end up drunks and some end up dead via suicide, you also have the few that end up being...The Beltway Sniper or Oklahoma City Bomber.

There are no avenues for Combat Engineers once they leave the Army, not a damn thing. Some can cope and some take it out on the world via a bomb or moving targets.

I am blessed to have a few friends that understand me and can sit on me when I get upset, otherwise I would be a figure on CNN being asked why??? as the experts try to determine what made a model soldier with a family - totally snap out!!!

I don't agree that former military people [especially Combat Engineers] have any right to snap out like some of us have over the last few years......even when - "Like Me" - they too were baited into taking that job because construction & civil engineering is what the job appeared to be, but it was not.

I don't agree but, I do understand the mindset & drive of a pissed off Engineer.

There does need to be a organization to help military members re-enter the Real World, but that won't happen because nobody gives a damn unless they know us personally.

[ October 22, 2003, 12:35 PM: Message edited by: LEONARD REMIX RROY ]

[Leslie]

Remix thanks and FWIW, I think you've found your calling, its just a matter of when you decide to do it.

[LEONARD REMIX RROY]

Originally posted by Leslie:
Remix thanks and FWIW, I think you've found your calling, its just a matter of when you decide to do it. If that calling is to be a Combat Engineer, I rather commit suicide than go threw Readjusting to regular life / non-military people again. In all truth, I'll never be the man I was prior to military life.

I did re-enlist so I could help troubled soldiers before it's too late but, my packet is on hold due to law violations that occured since my last enlistment.

[Leslie]

Originally posted by LEONARD REMIX RROY:

There does need to be a organization to help military members re-enter the Real World, but that won't happen because nobody gives a damn unless they know us personally. I was talking more along the lines of the above statement you made. Who better than you? Not within the military system, that way you can make it what ever YOU feel it nneds to be to help those people readjust.

[ October 22, 2003, 12:52 PM: Message edited by: Leslie ]

[LEONARD REMIX RROY]

Originally posted by Leslie:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LEONARD REMIX RROY:

There does need to be a organization to help military members re-enter the Real World, but that won't happen because nobody gives a damn unless they know us personally. I was talking more along the lines of the above statement you made. Who better than you? Not within the military system, that way you can make it what ever YOU feel it nneds to be to help those people readjust. </font>[/QUOTE]That requires funding that I do not have and perhaps a college degree just to be considered qualified so...I am a no go at that station.

What I re-enlisted for is Mental Health Specialist not Combat Engineer, I am waiting for a waiver that I may not recieve dut to the fact that (to the military) it look like a combat field soldier manipulated the system to get a indoor admin job. Once a person is placed in a combat slot, that is where the military want to keep them.

[Leslie]

Originally posted by LEONARD REMIX RROY:
[Once a person is placed in a combat slot, that is where the military want to keep them. Damn, sounds like how they pigeonhole/lable children in schools. Sad. Well thanks for sharing your experiences.

[LEONARD REMIX RROY]

Originally posted by Albert Diaz:
The moral is so low right now within the armed forces that I don't see how the government will ever be able to encourage recruitment in the future amongst our young men and women. We NEED to get the hell out of there or this will be Vietnam part II. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif If the employment situation continue to go downward, enlistment will go up. That is what happened in the Regan era.

[Fletch]

Tell me something. I thought Rangel supports the draft as a deterrent. I think his argument is if an Administration wants war, the public will think twice before supporting it: "Oh, s***, there's a draft".

[Leslie]

Originally posted by Fletch:
Tell me something. I thought Rangel supports the draft as a deterrent. I think his argument is if an Administration wants war, the public will think twice before supporting it: "Oh, s***, there's a draft". The best laid plans...what he intends and the reality of a situation can be worlds apart.

[Fletch]

Originally posted by LEONARD REMIX RROY:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Albert Diaz:
The moral is so low right now within the armed forces that I don't see how the government will ever be able to encourage recruitment in the future amongst our young men and women. We NEED to get the hell out of there or this will be Vietnam part II. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif If the employment situation continue to go downward, enlistment will go up. That is what happened in the Regan era. </font>[/QUOTE]Even if it is more likely now (than during Reagan) that a soldier may be shipped out?

[ October 22, 2003, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: Fletch ]

[jpsf]

if the republicans loose the military vote it will be huge.

[ChiJAM]

Originally posted by Leslie:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Fletch:
Tell me something. I thought Rangel supports the draft as a deterrent. I think his argument is if an Administration wants war, the public will think twice before supporting it: "Oh, s***, there's a draft". The best laid plans...what he intends and the reality of a situation can be worlds apart. </font>[/QUOTE]Fletch, that is his stated rationale, but I agree with Leslie.

ChiJAM

[mdpm99]

Originally posted by jpsf:
if the republicans loose the military vote it will be huge. Just saw a story yesterday that 110 or so soldiers who were on a 3 week leave here in the states did not show up to return to "Vietnam with no trees," i.e. Iraq. They (the government) have not offically called them awol's as of yet.

d

[Fletch]

Originally posted by ChiJAM:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Leslie:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Fletch:
Tell me something. I thought Rangel supports the draft as a deterrent. I think his argument is if an Administration wants war, the public will think twice before supporting it: "Oh, s***, there's a draft". The best laid plans...what he intends and the reality of a situation can be worlds apart. </font>[/QUOTE]Fletch, that is his stated rationale, but I agree with Leslie.

ChiJAM </font>[/QUOTE]On the one hand, there is the potential of the Law of Unintended Consequences (which Les and ChiJam are pointing out).

On the other hand, there may be a little bit of public sway in this entire situation. Is it true that quite a few House Republicans want to lend (as oppose to grant) Iraq and Afghanistan much of the $87 Billion? If true, this is an example of the public "thinking twice" about this whole scenario: "Oh, s***, $87 Bill is a ton of money for two countries just to be givin' out!".

[ October 22, 2003, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Fletch ]

[LEONARD REMIX RROY]

Originally posted by david mancuso:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by jpsf:
if the republicans loose the military vote it will be huge. Just saw a story yesterday that 110 or so soldiers who were on a 3 week leave here in the states did not show up to return to "Vietnam with no trees," i.e. Iraq. They (the government) have not offically called them awol's as of yet.

d </font>[/QUOTE]Believe it or not, that happens all the time when soldiers return for 30 days leave from Korea. I spent the remainder of my enlistment in Korea because I knew when I left Korea - no way in hell would I return.

It is a bad feeling living 5 miles or less - away from a million man army. That is a lose lose situation because we had aprox 32 seconds reaction time to a missle attack.

[LEONARD REMIX RROY]

Originally posted by Fletch:
"Oh, s***, $87 Bill is a ton of money for two countries just to be givin' out!". Money is there for that BS and 200K book bags for the children of Iraq while children in son poor areas of the USA don't have book's to put in a bag. Some children only meal is the food they recieve at school.

It is only a matter of time before the people of the USA revolt. My tax dollar should be spent on our children first! The "No Child Left Behind" plan is bulshit and a uncalled for plan. For this to be the greatest country on the planet, our children sure get the short end of the stick!

[Fletch]

Originally posted by LEONARD REMIX RROY:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Fletch:
"Oh, s***, $87 Bill is a ton of money for two countries just to be givin' out!". Money is there for that BS and 200K book bags for the children of Iraq while children in son poor areas of the USA don't have book's to put in a bag. Some children only meal is the food they recieve at school.

It is only a matter of time before the people of the USA revolt. My tax dollar should be spent on our children first! The "No Child Left Behind" plan is bulshit and a uncalled for plan. For this to be the greatest country on the planet, our children sure get the short end of the stick! </font>[/QUOTE]Leonard,

Like McEnroe said, "you can't be serious!" Book bags? I thought it was about new Hum V's and updated equipment for the troops. But this is the first I heard of book bags for Iraqi kids. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif

[ October 22, 2003, 02:17 PM: Message edited by: Fletch ]

[So easy a protic can do it (QUAD)]

Originally posted by LEONARD REMIX RROY:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Leslie:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LEONARD REMIX RROY:

There does need to be a organization to help military members re-enter the Real World, but that won't happen because nobody gives a damn unless they know us personally. I was talking more along the lines of the above statement you made. Who better than you? Not within the military system, that way you can make it what ever YOU feel it nneds to be to help those people readjust. </font>[/QUOTE]That requires funding that I do not have and perhaps a college degree just to be considered qualified so...I am a no go at that station.

What I re-enlisted for is Mental Health Specialist not Combat Engineer, I am waiting for a waiver that I may not recieve dut to the fact that (to the military) it look like a combat field soldier manipulated the system to get a indoor admin job. Once a person is placed in a combat slot, that is where the military want to keep them. </font>[/QUOTE]DUDE!!! THAT SUCKS MAJOR!! THAT'S JUST LIKE OUR GOV'T TO DO WHAT THEY WANNA DO TO KEEP PEEPS SUCH AS YOURSELF AWAY AND DOWN, NOT REALIZING YOU, WHO HAS THE EXPERIENCE, AND KNOWS WHAT IT TAKES TO HELP YOUR FELLOW MILITARY MEMBERS IN THAT SITUATION. I'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THE EXPERIENCE OF THE MILITARY, BUT I NOW HAVE A MORE UNDERSTANDING RESPECT FOR YOU AS A PERSON graemlins/respekt.gif

[ October 22, 2003, 03:03 PM: Message edited by: DJ QUAD ]