NC Mom discharged from Military

[auditor0007]

I'm getting a bit tired of this thread already. First of all, that article states that out of 25,000 of these reinstatements since 2001, 7500 have been granted exemptions or deferrals for various reasons. Do you think all 7500 of the others were women too? Pffffffttttttt!!!!! She's just one of 7500, so she's not looking for special treatement. Many others have been given the same exemption. Secondly, how many of you here bitching about her have ever served yourselves? If you have, then you have the right to bitch if you actually disagree with her discharge. If you haven't, then shut your trap because you were never willing to serve in the first place.

Who died and left you king?

What? you don't think she has a right to an opinion?

I'm a "he" Willow. And thank you. That was the best rebuttal they could come up with, since they couldn't respond to the actual question. Nearly one of every three who are reinstated receive exemptions or deferrals. 7500, and nobody bitches about them, just this woman.

And as I thought, it doesn't seem that any of the ones bitching about it actually served themselves. And Ravi calling this woman a coward, lmao. This woman served. She didn't desert; she didn't go AWOL. She was released, and yes, she knew she could be recalled. Does that mean those who can be recalled must put their entire lives on hold for a possibility of getting recalled, after they have already served? I love those who don't serve throwing the word coward around as if they are so brave. Maybe if more served, then they wouldn't have to recall all those that did back.

 

[Ravi]

Who died and left you king?

What? you don't think she has a right to an opinion?

I'm a "he" Willow. And thank you. That was the best rebuttal they could come up with, since they couldn't respond to the actual question. Nearly one of every three who are reinstated receive exemptions or deferrals. 7500, and nobody bitches about them, just this woman.

And as I thought, it doesn't seem that any of the ones bitching about it actually served themselves. And Ravi calling this woman a coward, lmao. This woman served. She didn't desert; she didn't go AWOL. She was released, and yes, she knew she could be recalled. Does that mean those who can be recalled must put their entire lives on hold for a possibility of getting recalled, after they have already served? I love those who don't serve throwing the word coward around as if they are so brave. Maybe if more served, then they wouldn't have to recall all those that did back.

I said maybe she's a coward. You can dance around all you want, but this woman has a husband who should be able to provide child care.

 

[WillowTree]

What? you don't think she has a right to an opinion?

I'm a "he" Willow. And thank you. That was the best rebuttal they could come up with, since they couldn't respond to the actual question. Nearly one of every three who are reinstated receive exemptions or deferrals. 7500, and nobody bitches about them, just this woman.

And as I thought, it doesn't seem that any of the ones bitching about it actually served themselves. And Ravi calling this woman a coward, lmao. This woman served. She didn't desert; she didn't go AWOL. She was released, and yes, she knew she could be recalled. Does that mean those who can be recalled must put their entire lives on hold for a possibility of getting recalled, after they have already served? I love those who don't serve throwing the word coward around as if they are so brave. Maybe if more served, then they wouldn't have to recall all those that did back.

I said maybe she's a coward. You can dance around all you want, but this woman has a husband who should be able to provide child care.

It has already been established that her husband travels extensively to put the bread on the table and to pay the mortgage,, paying the mortgage makes them both fine Americans in my book,, and her doing four years of service,, makes her a hero to boot.

 

[auditor0007]

What? you don't think she has a right to an opinion?

I'm a "he" Willow. And thank you. That was the best rebuttal they could come up with, since they couldn't respond to the actual question. Nearly one of every three who are reinstated receive exemptions or deferrals. 7500, and nobody bitches about them, just this woman.

And as I thought, it doesn't seem that any of the ones bitching about it actually served themselves. And Ravi calling this woman a coward, lmao. This woman served. She didn't desert; she didn't go AWOL. She was released, and yes, she knew she could be recalled. Does that mean those who can be recalled must put their entire lives on hold for a possibility of getting recalled, after they have already served? I love those who don't serve throwing the word coward around as if they are so brave. Maybe if more served, then they wouldn't have to recall all those that did back.

I said maybe she's a coward. You can dance around all you want, but this woman has a husband who should be able to provide child care.

Her husband is on the road for his job. It doesn't matter if he's a salesman or an OTR truck driver. You think people can just quit their jobs to stay at home with the kids when they have jobs where they spend more time away from home than at home? So, I guess her husband should give up his job, making whatever he does, so he can try to find a job locally that will probably pay him half of what he is making now? Then maybe they can be another family with a home going into foreclosure?

You don't know the circumstances that put this woman in the position she is in, yet you are so arrogant as to judge her. But you still haven't explained why it's okay for 7500 out of 25,000 others, but not for her. Obviously, the military hasn't made a big fuss over those 7500 that they granted exemptions or deferrals to, but you have a problem with it.

 

[editec]

Given that traditionally even when we had a full blown universal draft, ANY SCION with enough political influence could SKATE OUT of the draft because "they were needed to help run the family business" I think the USA can probably find it in their hearts to either:

1. Find this woman a billet where she can still take care of her children (i.e., a stateside billet); or,

2. Give her an HONORABLE HARDSHIP discharge.

Jesus K-rist on a crutch, what is wrong with some of you that you play such hard assed roles on this board, anyway?

Are you really this heartless in real life?

 

[Care4all]

Given that traditionally even when we had a full blown universal draft, ANY SCION with enough political influence could SKATE OUT of the draft because "they were needed to help run the family business" I think the USA can probably find it in their hearts to either:

1. Find this woman a billet where she can still take care of her children (i.e., a stateside billet); or,

2. Give her an HONORABLE HARDSHIP discharge.

Jesus K-rist on a crutch, what is wrong with some of you that you play such hard assed roles on this board, anyway?

Are you really this heartless in real life?

I don't get it either?

 

[Ravi]

Are you really this heartless in real life?

Sometimes. I did state somewhere up the thread that if she had a real hardship I'd have no problem with her being discharged. But quite honestly, she has a husband who could watch the kids and she knew what she was getting into when she signed up. It is hard for me to imagine a situation where a male would be let off the hook in this manner because his wife had a job that forced her to travel.

 

[catzmeow]

I agree. I'm a single working mother who travels for work. I have some degree of sympathy for single parents, because I know how difficult it is, but I also have very little sympathy for those who choose to honor their obligations because I know it can be done.

YOU DO WHAT YOU ARE OBLIGATED TO DO. Willow and others apparently have no problems with our nation taking a path of failing to honor commitments. That is not how our country has survived as long as it has.


For the record, I work in a dangerous field serving my country IN THE STATES already. My brother spent 10 years in the Navy, several of them as a single parent. My sister in law spent 20 years in the Navy as a single parent. Both seem to have managed to honor their responsibilities without asking for special treatment.

 

[catzmeow]

Are you really this heartless in real life?

When it comes to people living up to their duty? FUCK YES.

 

[Care4all]

1 in 3 are excused from a recall such as this....obviously, our government understands that people can not live their lives as though the military owns them when they are discharged....and rightfully so....

2/3's of those discharged that are recalled have the ability to become active again without putting a complete strain on their children but others will have things that come up around them, like a sick parent to take care of or children to be taken care of whose father or mother is unable to do such.

Let me make it clear where i stand on this....this woman gave 4 years of her reproductive life to our government and us, taking the chance that she could die, all for the love and future of our country which includes her children's future, and this sacrifice could have left her existing children, without a mother and in the hands of a single parent....she is no coward, she is no couch potato shouting out her own patriotism from the sidelines like many on this board!

As a mother, she has one duty first....and this is to her family...her children, then country....which to me is the same thing as her children.....

if circumstances in ones family changes to where her children would be put with strangers, her duty is to her children FIRST.

our government understands this, as said, or 1 in 3 would not get exemptions from them!

care

 

[Gunny]

NC mom recalled to Army duty will be discharged



I call bullshit on this nonsense. Girlfriend needs to grow the fuck up. If women want to be equals, they have to step up and be equals, even when it is difficult and challenging.

There have been a lot of times in my life when finding childcare was difficult. I worked it out.

I wish the military had not caved in this situation. It sets a dangerous precedent.

You can call bullshit if you want, but the fact is, childcare is not as easily available and/or affordable for single parents in the military as you would appear to think.

"Mom" isn't always thrilled to watch your little angel when you deploy. There's also the legal side of possible loss of custody to the other parent if they choose to push the issue while you are gone.

Sometimes things change and you are no longer able to fulfill your military commitments. I've seen commands say, "tough shit, that's your problem." It's a two-way street.

She's not a single parent. She's married.. Thus the reason I think she took them along simply so she WOULD be discharged.

That isn't a reason. Her husband travels. She is the sole means of daycare. He should quit his job? THEN how does he pay for daycare?

You people arguing against this discharge don't even know WTF you are talking about. Go enlist and walk a mile in my boots before passing judgment on me or one of my peers for something you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Gunny]

What? you don't think she has a right to an opinion?

I'm a "he" Willow. And thank you. That was the best rebuttal they could come up with, since they couldn't respond to the actual question. Nearly one of every three who are reinstated receive exemptions or deferrals. 7500, and nobody bitches about them, just this woman.

And as I thought, it doesn't seem that any of the ones bitching about it actually served themselves. And Ravi calling this woman a coward, lmao. This woman served. She didn't desert; she didn't go AWOL. She was released, and yes, she knew she could be recalled. Does that mean those who can be recalled must put their entire lives on hold for a possibility of getting recalled, after they have already served? I love those who don't serve throwing the word coward around as if they are so brave. Maybe if more served, then they wouldn't have to recall all those that did back.

I said maybe she's a coward. You can dance around all you want, but this woman has a husband who should be able to provide child care.

Hello? He TRAVELS FOR HIS JOB. How hard IS that?

 

[Gunny]

Are you really this heartless in real life?

Sometimes. I did state somewhere up the thread that if she had a real hardship I'd have no problem with her being discharged. But quite honestly, she has a husband who could watch the kids and she knew what she was getting into when she signed up. It is hard for me to imagine a situation where a male would be let off the hook in this manner because his wife had a job that forced her to travel.

You assume a lot.

One, it has been established that the husband CANNOT watch the kids.

Two, people's circumstances change from the time they sign up until they get out. I've never met ONE person who was discharged that didn't fully expect to never see the military again because that is the norm, and the usual expectation.

Three, I'm surprised this is any kind of an issue at all. It happens all the time in the military. People's circumstances change and they are discharged with a General under honorable Conditions for Good of the Service.

Then, I'd sure like to know what her MOS is that it is so damned critical to recall her from the IRR.

 

[michiganFats]

I looked her up yesterday on the internet. She's a truck driver.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It is the policy of the US Military that single parents that fail to provide adequate child support if deployed are to be discharged for the " Good of the service" This can result in a General Discharge that does not include the words Honorable. Most do not consider that a stain on the service rendered but it is.

Same with dual members, if both members are military they must have a plan in place to cover the children in case of deployment of both members or one, usually the mother will be discharged " for the Good of the Service".

 

[editec]

The presumption is that our military is there to protect the interests of the USA.

One has to assume that among the interests of the USA, one must include this woman's children.

She is the unique position of being the very best serviceperson to protect the interests of those children.

She's a truck driver in the military, so finding someone to replace her on the job is no big deal. There's a lot of people in the service and there's a lot of positions for a truck driver on US military bases, too.



She did her time, and she can to continue doing more time, as long as she can do so stateside, so I think that those of you who are outraged about her are being sort of childish.

 

[catzmeow]

The presumption is that our military is there to protect the interests of the USA.

One has to assume that among the interests of the USA, one must include this woman's children.

She is the unique position of being the very best serviceperson to protect the interests of those children.

She's a truck driver in the military, so finding someone to replace her on the job is no big deal. There's a lot of people in the service and there's a lot of positions for a truck driver on US military bases, too.



She did her time, and she can to continue doing more time, as long as she can do so stateside, so I think that those of you who are outraged about her are being sort of childish.

Many of us are single and/or working moms who have been there, done that with the childcare thing. And thus, figure that if we can do it, she can.

 

[WillowTree]

The presumption is that our military is there to protect the interests of the USA.

One has to assume that among the interests of the USA, one must include this woman's children.

She is the unique position of being the very best serviceperson to protect the interests of those children.

She's a truck driver in the military, so finding someone to replace her on the job is no big deal. There's a lot of people in the service and there's a lot of positions for a truck driver on US military bases, too.



She did her time, and she can to continue doing more time, as long as she can do so stateside, so I think that those of you who are outraged about her are being sort of childish.

Many of us are single and/or working moms who have been there, done that with the childcare thing. And thus, figure that if we can do it, she can.

yes,, and 96 percent of us have bought homes and paid our mortgages,, if we can do it so can the rest of you.. that's fair..

 

[Care4all]

The presumption is that our military is there to protect the interests of the USA.

One has to assume that among the interests of the USA, one must include this woman's children.

She is the unique position of being the very best serviceperson to protect the interests of those children.

She's a truck driver in the military, so finding someone to replace her on the job is no big deal. There's a lot of people in the service and there's a lot of positions for a truck driver on US military bases, too.



She did her time, and she can to continue doing more time, as long as she can do so stateside, so I think that those of you who are outraged about her are being sort of childish.

Many of us are single and/or working moms who have been there, done that with the childcare thing. And thus, figure that if we can do it, she can.

How have you really been there Catz? As a single mother, did the government send you overseas for a year where you were not allowed to bring your children?

i don't think it is the same...catz....the struggles of a single mother and this particular scenario of being sent overseas?

Care

 

[Mr. President]

She signed the papers she needs to get a grip on reality she had a family care plan designed when she was active duty saying where the children would go if a situation like this arrises. Her husband and children would be given on post housing and taken care of. She doesn't want to serve, it's not about her family because the Army would have made sure they were taken care of. So can we please stop babying this woman and make her fulfil her obligations? I have seen single fathers deployed and their children were taken care of.

I don't know why the question of single is even brought up because her husband is still in America not in the military and would be around to take care of the children. The Army should have made her fulfil her obligation you know the thing they PAID HER TO DO.