Pentagon plans to cut pay of our soldiers in Iraq by $225/month

Now that's supporting the troops!

 

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/reuters20030814_644.html

Fixed.

 

http://www.theonion.com/onion3921/bush_visits_uss_truman.html

What does it say about our society when The Onion turns out to be a reliable news source?

 

In fairness, they're not getting a pay cut, they're just not going to get a pay raise.

Doesn't change the fact that it's despicable, however.

 

Support Our Troops!* *As long as it doesn't cost us anything

I wonder how long it's going to take the right-wingers here to find a way to blame this on Clinton.

 

Re: Support Our Troops!* *As long as it doesn't cost us anything

Well, I'm not one of your right-wingers, but I gotta say give 'em both credit where it's due.

 

Isn't Gertz about as credible as The Onion? And Scarborough even less so?

 

Of course, people only read what they WANT to read, and only deduce what they WANT to deduce.

Re:

"We prefer other compensation powers to ensure that we target benefits on the troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan," [Assistant Secretary of Defense David Chu] added, citing incentive and other packages that the Pentagon is authorized to use....

Chu and Defense Department spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said the Pentagon planned all along to use incentive and other measures to keep paychecks in Afghanistan and Iraq at current levels, (emphasis mine) even if danger and family separation pay went down.

By the way, the Pentagon is now pursuing a policy of having service personnel's families pay NO housing costs whatsoever -- a huge bite out of their meagre paychecks.

 

That's it?

 

This is the money phrase:

the Pentagon planned all along to use incentive and other measures to keep paychecks in Afghanistan and Iraq at current levels

There are a couple of things in this phrase that our unfortunately idiotic press will never seek to question.

The major one is what are incentive and other measures? As someone who has worked for some real crappy companies who had "incentive" bonuses I can tell you that 99% of the employees never reached the said "incentives". I have no idea if that is the case here but questions need to be asked.

Does this mean that only certain solidiers will keep their pay? What are the other measures?

Sadly, of course, our conservative media will fail to ask these questions.

 

Tell me something: what don't you understand about the phrase:

"keep paychecks at current levels."???

Of course, the reaction of the pols is that the expiration of the PROVISIONS for THIS particular VERSION of danger and leave pay is a PAY CUT.

But, anyway, enjoy your cynicism.

 

Karl that is disingenuous as hell and you know it.

You know it IS okay to criticize our Liar-in-Chief and his pal Rummy sometimes. I did it all the time to Clinton when he was Prez.

Let me turn your little statement around on you with a different subject- so if the Bush tax cuts were phased out in 2005, it wouldn't really be a raise in taxes but instead a return to previous levels. Isn't that right? Tell me you would not be the first one carping about Tax Increases?

Pardon me if I just don't trust Rummy to do right by our troops. Using phrases like "incentive pay" just sets off alarm bells as it MAY put conditions on a bonus that previously was guaranteed just by virute of being in a combat zone and putting your ass on the line for this country.

I have no idea what the "incentive and other measures" are that are going to guarantee that "paychecks are going to stay at current levels". I want to know. Is that too much to ask? Don't YOU want to know?

If I had to hazard a guess, because of the public backlash the soldiers stationed in Iraq are going to be unaffected, but this is going to come at the expense of soldiers in hotspots in the rest of the world

 

Sheesh.

Let me go slow for you.

If my taxes are INCREASED from their CURRENT level, net, then, yes, I have a tax hike NOW, no matter WHAT my taxes were 1 year ago or 20 years ago.

If my paycheck is "staying at its CURRENT level," I am not experiencing a pay cut.

Really, is that so hard??

Sure, feel free to think Rummy is the devil incarnate, and that the Pentagon would mercilessly cut the pay of the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, with all its attendant PR fallout.

Sure, that makes sense. Right.

 

From the ABC news article

Chu conceded that the pay of some U.S. troops serving in other difficult areas of the world could fall if Congress did not reinstate the incentive increases, but that the Pentagon favored an end to the broad package as it constantly reviewed compensation in different deployment areas.

Bush administration = three card monte table

 

El Jefe. Supports the Dallas Burn.

Hooo Boy.

 

Re: From the ABC news article

OK, what's the title of THIS thread?

Why, it's

"Pentagon plans to cut pay of our soldiers in Iraq by $225/month."

As far as I can tell, and unless someone else can quote me specific information from other sources confirming it, this specific statement is a false assertion.

And an assertion made, quite predictably, in the spirit of conclusion jumping that is as rampant on this board as the luv-scan virus.

Now you want to talk about issues BEYOND that...well that's a different story. But again, what do we know about the details of this? What if paychecks go down for the guy in Greenland, but his wife and kids at Ft. Benning get a higher housing allowance? Or don't have to pay any housing costs?

Anyway, neither you, nor I, know enough about this subject to speak authoritatively about it.

Of course, it's much easier, and of course not unexpected, to simply engage in a cynical slam.

 

Well, it's obviously not hazardous anymore.

 

Re: Re: Pentagon plans to cut pay of our soldiers in Iraq by $225/month

Every successful enterprise employs cost-of-living pay raises.

Except the U.S. military.

Now maybe you want to argue that the U.S. military is an unsuccessful enterprise.

Be... my... guest....

 

Four more Years for Bush!

 

$225/month is a pretty paltry sum ($2700/year) for being forced to be away from your family and being in imminent danger of being killed.

I can't believe there is ANYONE who can say that cutting this allowance is a good idea. I say keep the $225/month AND allow families to stay in base housing for free at the same time.

It's the least we can do for the men and women who have been put in harm's way.

 

************in' a, I agree with Mike.

They (can't remember if it was the Pentagon or Congress or Bush, but somebody) announced the pay hikes would be re-instated, however, so it's a non-issue.