military pay cuts?

**Winnie** · 03-19-2011, 10:01 AM

I, to a point agree too. I do believe men in a unit would probably be less of an effective team because of the presence of a woman maybe to the point of endangerment. But I suppose because I'm a woman, I feel if a woman wants to be on the front line she should be given that choice. Personally? I wouldn't want that(I'm old fashioned too). But theres' the rub. Men do not have a choice, so if you're going to allow women on the front line, then they should all go or none at all.
Oh and I happen to think fathers are just as important, but I was a Daddys' girl!

**oldsoldier** · 03-19-2011, 09:54 PM

Originally Posted by sushidog

Oldsoldier, I hear what you're saying. I served with a few "life takers and baby makers" myself. In 1977 I was in Ft. Riley, Kansas, home of the Big Red One (the first and finest infantry division.) You know what they say, "If you're going to be one, you might as well be a big red one!"

Chip

Chip never got to serve with them. Never was a "LEG" spent more time jumpin' outa' perfectly good airplanes and choppers.

**Rick** · 03-19-2011, 10:53 PM

Chip, I believe similar arguments have been offered up for African Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics, Asian and Gays. If a woman wants to serve in a combat unit my guess is she can perform as well as men. Probably better than a good number of them. Women serve in combat roles in no less than 11 countries today. You might want to talk to Sgt. Lee Ann Hester and ask her how she earned her Silver Star in combat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_Ann_Hester

**sushidog** · 03-19-2011, 11:41 PM

You're right Rick, let's just send all women into combat and exterminate the human race in the process. We need exterminating anyway just to consider such an inhuman act. I'll just stay at home, knit doilies and breast feed my kids.

Maybe it's sort of a Darwin award, that these people don't need to reproduce anyway. As I've said before, I've served with many honorable, proficient and dedicated female soldiers, just not in combat. While we're at it, let's "allow" children, the mentally deficient and suicidal, drug users and convicted felons to serve in combat too. I'm aware that some women make excellent cold blooded killers, of this I have no doubt. By the way, have you met my Ex?

Anyway, what does my opinion matter? The world is going to hell in a handbasket and there is certainly nothing I can do about it. I just pray that Christ comes quickly.

Chip

**LowKey** · 03-20-2011, 08:22 AM

I'm an old fart too sushidog, never served, but I see women as far more than 'the fairer sex' suitable only for staying at home making babies. The terms you are using and the way you are saying it make it sound like that is what you believe.

A woman is a fully capable human being.

Will a woman go all gaga over a buddy's guts spattered on her uniform (which is no more pretty than the guy's next to her)? The initial shock would rattle anyone, man or woman. But consider that a lot of women are very capable nurses, doctors, or EMTs in roles that put them where blood spatters and destroyed bodies are a daily occurrence, I don't think a woman would go to pieces any more than any man in that same situation.

If a person is capable and trained for combat, and today, signs up for whatever the military decides to do with them, then they should fill the roll they are most capable of doing. If that is combat, good for them. What everybody skirts is the POW issue. Face it, that is the real, squeamish reason men don't want women out there. Because men know what other men are capable of doing. Especially men that would resent a woman taking up arms against them.

I know, I haven't 'been there' so I should shut up. But I hope some of the Firefighters and Police Officers here can respond on women's abilities on the front lines of domestic battles at least.

**Rick** · 03-20-2011, 08:59 AM

Chip - Your opinion is your own. However, you response diluted your position rather than enforcing it. I was offering up some items to consider not deriding your position. Not all women will fill the combat role just as not all women choose to be LEO or EMT. Nor would all women be qualified just as all men are not. I would think any woman that has the credentials to land a 12+ton aircraft on a bobbing deck at night with minimal lighting has a pretty good set a cajones, if you'll pardon the expression. You would not want to see what I can do with that aircraft. I wouldn't be pretty at all.

**sushidog** · 03-20-2011, 09:51 AM

If my comments appeared to be sexist, I appologize to any women reading these posts as surely this is not my intent. However there are many who ignore the obvious physical and emotional differences between men and women. Am I painting with a broad brush? Absolutely. Are their frail, effeminate men and butch, macho women? Most certainly, but it's not the physical differences that concern me. Neither is it the capabilities of any human being, especially women, when push comes to shove and it's time to step up to the plate and do heroic deeds.

I'm just saying we need to match the correct tool to the job at hand. You wouldn't dig in the garden with a silver spoon, would you? A steel spade is much more suitable for this purpose. Again you wouldn't dine with a shovel, would you? If you dig in the dirt with a silver spoon you can easily damage it rendering it unsuitable for it's intended purpose. Recognizing the obvious gender differences may not be politically correct, but they are real. As a survivalist I tend to be a realist. I do not color the world as I wish it to be, but am merely photographing the images I see.

Yes, we have an all volunteer military now, but this is the exception to all of recorded history. How many among us still remember their draft number. Mine was 300. I think it's delusional to think that we will always have a volunteer military. The cost is far too high to fund a major war. The military has always been about sacrifice. Yes there have been many in recent years who have survived to make it a career. However the vast majority of people who have served in any military throughtout time have and will always be the ones who sacrifice their lives and futures for the sake of others. I would like to see women removed from this pool of available draftee's, how about you? If we set a precident so everyone believes (and the few that volunteer demonstrate) that they are 100% effective in combat, roughly the equivalent of a male soldier, it will be impossible to reverse this trend when the worst happens. And believe me it will.

I have purposely not addressed the issue of the enhanced torture techniques to which females will be subjected at the hands of their captors, as I feel this is incidental to my case. Women who enter combat are certainly aware of the very real possibility of capture and must decide ahead of time if they will allow themselves to be captured when faced with its certainty, or act in a manor similar to the Japanese, denying the enemy the satisfaction and information derived from their capture. A quick, clean death is much preferable to the mental hardships one is forced to endure and relive when one survives extended combat, regardless of gender. One always questions how they survived when apparently more capable comrads they served alongside didn't. We relive events over and over in our minds asking ourselves if there was something that could have happened differently. Could we have done something differently which could have altered the outcome? The "what if" scenarios never end. This torture is as potent as any the enemy could devise, and is the reason many combat vets choose to seek relief by ending their lives. Many (I dare say most) can't leave the combat experience "in country" but take it home with them and relive it almost every night and day. This is the torture I wish to spare "the fairer sex." If I'm a sexist for wishing this, so be it. However someone must live peaceful lives, without knowing these horrors, to make these sacrifices meaningful. If not women and children, who are we fighting and dying for? What's the point of it all?

Chip

**Justin Case** · 03-20-2011, 09:57 AM

Just sayin

**white84wof** · 04-08-2011, 02:50 PM

I am the wife of a SSG in the army and he called me about ten min ago to tell me that he was only paid 1000 dollars this pay period. So yes the rumors are true that they are taking money from the soldiers. I know it may seem like a lot of money to some people but we do not live on post and his bah is normally more than 1000 a month. I am afraid of what this is going to mean for our family. He is the sole provider for us and I am a college student right now. I don't know what we are going to do. I also wonder if this is going to affect my gi bill. I am using the gi bill to go to college and i just got out of the military two months ago. Right now we are all scared and extremely angry. How are we going to pay all of our bills. How can the people in the big office justify taking money from the soldiers when they make more than most of us can dream about and they only have to serve one term and get a paycheck for the rest of their lives. That is not even counting all the free crap that they get because they are the fat cats. I just called some guys in my old unit and there are people that have only gotten paid 300 dollars. Were is the justice in all of this?!!!!!!

**Rick** · 04-08-2011, 05:21 PM

Why don't you stop by the Introductions section and tell us a bit about yourself. Since this is your first post we have no idea whether you are legit or not.

**doug1980** · 04-08-2011, 06:29 PM

Well my wife got her pay cut in half for this month because the budget isn't finished. She will get back pay but I don't think our bill collectors will care.

**armywifehawaii** · 04-08-2011, 07:31 PM

my husband is an active duty deploying soldier, they didnt cut military pay completely, they only alotted military 50%. all soldiers got single soldier pay, even those with families.