Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 02:14:29PM -0400, Paul Hart wrote: On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 09:09 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote: It seems that the military is claiming that we are in a national emergency and they can do whatever they want, despite laws to the contrary. You are in a national emergency. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010914-5.html Yes, of course, we will always be in a national emergency. Very convenient, eh? Using that logic, we didn't even need the unpatriot act enacted, they can simply evade any and all laws/bill of rights on the basis that we are in a national emergency just on the scumbag prez's say so. Isn't this essentially what every dictator does? -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 09:09 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote: It seems that the military is claiming that we are in a national emergency and they can do whatever they want, despite laws to the contrary. You are in a national emergency. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010914-5.html
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:01:38AM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote: Peter Thonen wrote.. On that same note, any weekend warrior who complains about being activated has no sympathy from me. Take the devils coin, be prepared to do his work also. Well, what if the Devil stole that $ from you in the first place? What level of subversion is appropriate in order to re-appropriate those $$$? This case is clearly different from the true blue career war criminal, ehr I mean career soldier. Here, these people have likely been paying taxes for a while! So I don't mind too much if they're trying to dodge their commitment in this context. I think also a great many of the young guys joined the National Guard in a patriotic fervor right after 9/11, but by the time the crusade against Iraq got started, quite a few had become well aware that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, that the invasion was all about oil, etc, and weren't willing to go. It seems that the military is claiming that we are in a national emergency and they can do whatever they want, despite laws to the contrary. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
Peter Thonen wrote.. On that same note, any weekend warrior who complains about being activated has no sympathy from me. Take the devils coin, be prepared to do his work also. Well, what if the Devil stole that $ from you in the first place? What level of subversion is appropriate in order to re-appropriate those $$$? This case is clearly different from the true blue career war criminal, ehr I mean career soldier. Here, these people have likely been paying taxes for a while! So I don't mind too much if they're trying to dodge their commitment in this context. -TD From: Thoenen, Peter CIV Sprint [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Harmon Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 16:52:25 +0200 Harmon Seaver wrote: On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 10:37:15PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 02:33 PM 8/17/03 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote: Just heard about this local guy who reluctantly went to Iraq because he was in the reserves, now his contract is up (as of 7/31) and they won't let him out. Did he reluctantly take the $$$ to be in the reserves, too? my enlistment contract ended and the I have been involuntarily extended. SOP. Happened during the Yugo thang too. On a semi related side note, how long has this guy been in (total length of service)? All personnel when they join the US Military are quite clearly informed they have an 8-year commitment, regardless of how long their initial enlistment is. If your initial commitment is less than 8 years, you are moved into the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR) for the remainder of the 8 years. (E.g. you enlist for 4 years active or ready reserve (weekend warriors); you will also spend 4 years in IRR). While in the IRR you have no requirements other than to keep the government informed of your current contact information. You have no drills and receive no benefits. The US Government though reserves the right to call you up at whim any time during this period. I am curious if this person is still within his 8-year commitment even though he completed his initial commitment. If he is still within this 8 year window, he doesnt have a leg to stand on nor my sympathy. On that same note, any weekend warrior who complains about being activated has no sympathy from me. Take the devils coin, be prepared to do his work also. The few folk that have my sympathy are those IRR folk that have be activated. I have a couple IRR buddies who haven't so much as thought about the military in years all of a sudden get activated for Iraq, now thats something to complain about. 4 years active, 3 years smoking dope in college, then a call from the good old us army ordering you to report to your IRR unit within 48 hours and go to Iraq. Those are the folk I feel sorry for. They did their time, got out, and didn't continue to take the devils coin ever 4th weekend. It hasn't, it only requires males to register. So far. How is that for some equally rights. Women continue to whine and cry that they are being discriminated against in the military as the military refused to open up certain all male MOS's (18 and 11 series to name a couple) yet I don't see them hounding congress for the equal right to be drafted. Nothing like having your cake and getting to eat it to. ** OFFTOPIC: Anybody remember the exact saying (and who coined it) about if you take the Devil's coin, don't complain about doing the Devil's work. I can not seem to find the exact text ** -Peter DISCLAIMER: Like always, this email is the personal opinion of Peter Thoenen and not condoned by Sprint or the US Army. [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature] _ bHelp protect your PC:/b Get a free online virus scan at McAfee.com. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
Peter Thoenen wrote... That is the same logic I use to justify to myself working as a defense contractor. The amount uncle sam will pay me in my lifetime is greater than or equal to the amount I will ever actually pay him in taxes. I win in the long run :) Just make sure those bombs you're building don't actually work! Otherwise, keep on bleeding the beast... -TD From: Thoenen, Peter CIV Sprint [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 19:20:15 +0200 Tyler Durden wrote: Peter Thonen wrote.. On that same note, any weekend warrior who complains about being activated has no sympathy from me. Take the devils coin, be prepared to do his work also. Well, what if the Devil stole that $ from you in the first place? What level of subversion is appropriate in order to re-appropriate those $$$? -TD That is the same logic I use to justify to myself working as a defense contractor. The amount uncle sam will pay me in my lifetime is greater than or equal to the amount I will ever actually pay him in taxes. I win in the long run :) -Peter attach3 _ bGet MSN 8/b and enjoy automatic e-mail virus protection. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
On Sunday, August 17, 2003, at 12:33 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote: Just heard about this local guy who reluctantly went to Iraq because he was in the reserves, now his contract is up (as of 7/31) and they won't let him out. I've known for more than 40 years that there's always been language in the deal the Reservists make that say they can be called back as needed, in times of war. And kept in until not needed. If this guy didn't know that Reserve pay comes with strings attached, he should have. No sympathy from me. --Tim May
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
On Sunday, August 17, 2003, at 01:43 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote: On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 02:04:09PM -0700, Tim May wrote: On Sunday, August 17, 2003, at 12:33 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote: Just heard about this local guy who reluctantly went to Iraq because he was in the reserves, now his contract is up (as of 7/31) and they won't let him out. I've known for more than 40 years that there's always been language in the deal the Reservists make that say they can be called back as needed, in times of war. And kept in until not needed. If this guy didn't know that Reserve pay comes with strings attached, he should have. No sympathy from me. That doesn't jive with the statutes: You said he was in the reserves. And that's what I commented on. Below you are quoting use of the _National Guard_. National Guard !=! Armed Forces Reserves (any of the services) Activating reservists has a familiar name: calling up the reserves. And when reservists are activated, they are back in their respective services, e.g., the Army, the Navy, whatever. And once back in the Army, they are subject to the usual extensions of their duty during wartime. Reservists are not the same as National Guard. (In fact, there should be more debate about Bush having the authority to send the National Guard (of any state) into battle. It is supposed to be the Governors of states which can call up the National Guard.) TITLE 10 Subtitle E PART II CHAPTER 1211 Sec. 12407. Sec. 12407. - National Guard in Federal service: period of service; apportionment (a) Whenever the President calls the National Guard of a State into Federal service, he may specify in the call the period of service. Members and units called shall serve inside or outside the territory of the United States during the term specified, unless sooner relieved by the President. However, no member of the National Guard may be kept in Federal service beyond the term of his commission or enlistment. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com --Tim May A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. --Robert A. Heinlein
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
At 02:33 PM 8/17/03 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote: Just heard about this local guy who reluctantly went to Iraq because he was in the reserves, now his contract is up (as of 7/31) and they won't let him out. Did he reluctantly take the $$$ to be in the reserves, too? my enlistment contract ended and the I have been involuntarily extended. SOP. Happened during the Yugo thang too. I am now a prisoner of the US army. Pity the volunteer moral zombie! Sucks to give up control to .mil, no? I find it very troubling that the USA would force people against their free will to be in the military, It hasn't, it only requires males to register. So far. Maybe Faust should be required reading for potential warriors?
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 03:21:43PM -0700, Tim May wrote: On Sunday, August 17, 2003, at 01:43 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote: On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 02:04:09PM -0700, Tim May wrote: On Sunday, August 17, 2003, at 12:33 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote: Just heard about this local guy who reluctantly went to Iraq because he was in the reserves, now his contract is up (as of 7/31) and they won't let him out. I've known for more than 40 years that there's always been language in the deal the Reservists make that say they can be called back as needed, in times of war. And kept in until not needed. If this guy didn't know that Reserve pay comes with strings attached, he should have. No sympathy from me. That doesn't jive with the statutes: You said he was in the reserves. And that's what I commented on. Below you are quoting use of the _National Guard_. Sorry, I mispoke -- he's in the Guard. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 10:37:15PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 02:33 PM 8/17/03 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote: Just heard about this local guy who reluctantly went to Iraq because he was in the reserves, now his contract is up (as of 7/31) and they won't let him out. Did he reluctantly take the $$$ to be in the reserves, too? my enlistment contract ended and the I have been involuntarily extended. SOP. Happened during the Yugo thang too. So a contract isn't a contract anymore, eh? It's changed unilaterally by USG whenever and however they want? Well, I suppose there's good precedence for that too -- ask any Native American. (snip) I find it very troubling that the USA would force people against their free will to be in the military, It hasn't, it only requires males to register. So far. It certainly is in this case, and, I'm sure, in many others. If you sign a contract to work for me for a year, and at the end of that year, I lock the factory door and won't let you out, send big mean guys with guns to make sure you stay seated at your machine and keep working -- what would you call that? Slavery? -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
Harmon Seaver wrote: On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 10:37:15PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 02:33 PM 8/17/03 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote: Just heard about this local guy who reluctantly went to Iraq because he was in the reserves, now his contract is up (as of 7/31) and they won't let him out. Did he reluctantly take the $$$ to be in the reserves, too? my enlistment contract ended and the I have been involuntarily extended. SOP. Happened during the Yugo thang too. On a semi related side note, how long has this guy been in (total length of service)? All personnel when they join the US Military are quite clearly informed they have an 8-year commitment, regardless of how long their initial enlistment is. If your initial commitment is less than 8 years, you are moved into the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR) for the remainder of the 8 years. (E.g. you enlist for 4 years active or ready reserve (weekend warriors); you will also spend 4 years in IRR). While in the IRR you have no requirements other than to keep the government informed of your current contact information. You have no drills and receive no benefits. The US Government though reserves the right to call you up at whim any time during this period. I am curious if this person is still within his 8-year commitment even though he completed his initial commitment. If he is still within this 8 year window, he doesnt have a leg to stand on nor my sympathy. On that same note, any weekend warrior who complains about being activated has no sympathy from me. Take the devils coin, be prepared to do his work also. The few folk that have my sympathy are those IRR folk that have be activated. I have a couple IRR buddies who haven't so much as thought about the military in years all of a sudden get activated for Iraq, now thats something to complain about. 4 years active, 3 years smoking dope in college, then a call from the good old us army ordering you to report to your IRR unit within 48 hours and go to Iraq. Those are the folk I feel sorry for. They did their time, got out, and didn't continue to take the devils coin ever 4th weekend. It hasn't, it only requires males to register. So far. How is that for some equally rights. Women continue to whine and cry that they are being discriminated against in the military as the military refused to open up certain all male MOS's (18 and 11 series to name a couple) yet I don't see them hounding congress for the equal right to be drafted. Nothing like having your cake and getting to eat it to. ** OFFTOPIC: Anybody remember the exact saying (and who coined it) about if you take the Devil's coin, don't complain about doing the Devil's work. I can not seem to find the exact text ** -Peter DISCLAIMER: Like always, this email is the personal opinion of Peter Thoenen and not condoned by Sprint or the US Army. pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 04:52:25PM +0200, Thoenen, Peter CIV Sprint wrote: On a semi related side note, how long has this guy been in (total length of service)? All personnel when they join the US Military are quite clearly informed they have an 8-year commitment, regardless of how long their initial enlistment is. If your initial commitment is less than 8 years, you are moved into the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR) for the remainder of the 8 years. (E.g. you enlist for 4 years active or ready reserve (weekend warriors); you will also spend 4 years in IRR). This is the guard. (snip) On that same note, any weekend warrior who complains about being activated has no sympathy from me. Take the devils coin, be prepared to do his work also. Yup - I don't have any sympathy for him being called up and sent over, but when the contract is over, the law says they have to release him and can't extend his hitch. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: US soldiers in Iraq held against their will
On Mon, 2003-08-18 at 10:02, Harmon Seaver wrote: On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 04:52:25PM +0200, Thoenen, Peter CIV Sprint wrote: On a semi related side note, how long has this guy been in (total length of service)? All personnel when they join the US Military are quite clearly informed they have an 8-year commitment, regardless of how long their initial enlistment is. If your initial commitment is less than 8 years, you are moved into the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR) for the remainder of the 8 years. (E.g. you enlist for 4 years active or ready reserve (weekend warriors); you will also spend 4 years in IRR). This is the guard. Don't forget the reserves in additional to the Guard. One point, its a bit of a stretch to call the guard or reserves weekend warriors anymore. Many of those units are deployed on active duty for long stretches of time (12 months or longer) due to increasing military committments around the world. Further, many of the SF groups, which see a lot of use these days, are part of the National Guard as well and rarely go unused by the Pentagon. -- Michael T. Shinn KeyID: 91C0781F Key fingerprint = 05 81 9F 80 0E CE DB AE 02 6F 0D B8 D9 CC 0F A2 http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x91C0781F
