Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   You remember that 2-year time limit on active duty for reservists? Yeah, just kidding   ( spokesmanreview.com) divider line
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

13666 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Jan 2007 at 6:44 AM (11 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



402 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2007-01-12 12:21:39 AM  
..."_Extra pay will be provided for Guard and Reserve troops who are required to mobilize more than once in six years; active-duty troops who get less than two years between overseas deployments also will get extra pay. Details were not provided.

Oooooooooh, an extra $3.50!
 
2007-01-12 12:53:02 AM  
Bonzo_1116: Oooooooooh, an extra $3.50!

and if the dems vote to withold funding for Bush's new endeavor, FOX"news" will cast it as the dems trying to prevent the troops from getting their $3.50
 
2007-01-12 12:57:24 AM  
Tree Fiddy!
God Dammit Soldier, I ain't gonna give you no tree fiddy!

/This is some messed up stuff ... where will they get the money without raising taxes?
 
2007-01-12 01:09:55 AM  
Should be no problem, right? I mean, you can lie to the government if they lied to you first, right? Traffic stop, DMV, hell -- court -- lie your ass off. It's only fair.
 
2007-01-12 01:11:43 AM  
POAC - and if the dems vote to withold funding for Bush's new endeavor, FOX"news" will cast it as the dems trying to prevent the troops from getting their $3.50

yes. and they'll "accidentally" misplace the decimal point in the onscreen graphic/grawler.
 
2007-01-12 02:38:00 AM  
Bonzo_1116: Oooooooooh, an extra $3.50!

Enough to buy a box of cereal, yay! Too bad you can't enjoy cereal when you're dead.
 
2007-01-12 03:45:26 AM  
And they wonder why I didn't sign my reup papers.
 
2007-01-12 06:15:45 AM  
POAC [TotalFark]


and if the dems vote to withold funding for Bush's new endeavor, FOX"news" will cast it as the dems trying to prevent the troops from getting their $3.50


Even more, revisionist historians will blame the eventual failure in Iraq on liberals in congress for hem stringing presidental efforts, and its already happening. On C-Span yesterday I heard one guy talking about how "Washington" wasn't "allowing" our soldiers to win. He suggested that if we simply allowed them to do their job they would easily win this war! Echoes of Vietnam much?
 
2007-01-12 06:48:23 AM  
ChairmanKaga: POAC [TotalFark]

and if the dems vote to withold funding for Bush's new endeavor, FOX"news" will cast it as the dems trying to prevent the troops from getting their $3.50

Even more, revisionist historians will blame the eventual failure in Iraq on liberals in congress for hem stringing presidental efforts, and its already happening. On C-Span yesterday I heard one guy talking about how "Washington" wasn't "allowing" our soldiers to win. He suggested that if we simply allowed them to do their job they would easily win this war! Echoes of Vietnam much?


Guy who wants to win the war making a Vietnam allusion: 1

People who want us to lose the war or do not support it making Vietnam allusions: 118,234,235,765,456

Man, that guy should stop biatching, shouldn't he?
 
2007-01-12 06:49:00 AM  
dillenger69: where will they get the money without raising taxes?

Your grandchildren.
 
2007-01-12 06:49:26 AM  
POAC: Bonzo_1116: Oooooooooh, an extra $3.50!

and if the dems vote to withold funding for Bush's new endeavor, FOX"news" will cast it as the dems trying to prevent the troops from getting their $3.50


Funny that you make fun of Fox News and yet you plug a left-wing propaganda site. Douchebag much?
 
2007-01-12 06:50:15 AM  
Anyone else think this guy (FTA: "Joint Chiefs Chairman, Gen. Peter Pace") looks like John Kerry's clone?

[image from spokesmanreview.com too old to be available]
 
2007-01-12 06:50:33 AM  
[image from images.southparkstudios.com too old to be available]
disapprove
 
2007-01-12 06:50:56 AM  
Please someone tell me this article has the facts wrong and that this isn't true. Tell me I read this wrong. Tell me the article was misleading.
 
2007-01-12 06:50:57 AM  
Does Gen. Pace look a lot like John Kerry to anyone else?
 
2007-01-12 06:51:41 AM  
where will they get the money without raising taxes?

Same place they got all the rest of the money to do all the rest of their crap for the last six years. (a) Printing money; (b) Taking out loans.

Still think your "Halp us John Carry" banner is funny, soldier?
 
2007-01-12 06:54:48 AM  
We need to start a legal foundation for the troops who want protection for abandoning the military and going AWOL.

They may of signed up for it, but I'd still forgive them.
 
2007-01-12 06:55:12 AM  
How in the hell did we manage to scrounge up 500,000 troops for Gulf War I and yet fifteen years later, 150,000 troops in Iraq has the U.S. Army stretched thin?

Where the hell is everybody? Where'd they all go?

/some superpower we are
 
2007-01-12 06:55:20 AM  
Now that we've attacked Iran ("and that's the Circle of Liiiife!") and are talking tough about fighting them and Syria while we're sinking into Iraq and fighting in Afghanistan I have one question for the POTUS.

Him and what Army? We've already scraped the barrel. Now we're kicking the bottom out of the sucker. And the Pentagon is saying that we need 92,000 more troops. Shrubus Minimus will go down in history as the one who not only screwed the pooch but failed to give Fido the common courtesy of a reach around.
 
2007-01-12 06:55:39 AM  
Joint Chiefs Chairman, Gen. Peter Pace
[image from jcs.mil too old to be available]
 
2007-01-12 06:56:23 AM  
sorry, it be huge
 
2007-01-12 06:57:56 AM  
November: sorry, it be huge

Four stars! Didn't think we had any of those.

Is he the only one?
 
2007-01-12 06:58:19 AM  
haha, I was medically discharged...suck it!
 
2007-01-12 06:59:02 AM  
"The Killbots? A trifle. It was simply a matter of outsmarting them. ... You see the killbots have a preset kill limit; knowing their weakness I sent wave after wave of my own men at them until they reached their limit and shutdown."
[image from img153.imageshack.us too old to be available]

Me thinks Zap Brannigan is working as Bush's senior military advisor.
 
2007-01-12 07:00:05 AM  
haha, I was medically discharged...suck it!

Don't wander off too far. You'll need to be ready to report for your medical review. Only takes one arm to fire a gun.
 
2007-01-12 07:01:25 AM  
52,000,000 people voted for the war

that;s 52,000,000 people who are willing to be shipped out to fight it

start making those phone calls, bush
 
2007-01-12 07:02:28 AM  
Why does that general have the German, Belgian, Spanish and USSR flags amongst his decorations?
 
2007-01-12 07:02:48 AM  
UKerupt: 52,000,000 people voted for the war

Nice troll.
 
2007-01-12 07:04:06 AM  
Heh that all volunteer army was a nice experiment ........Bush has ruined that too .......a draft will be the only means of getting enough people in the service now unless they want to lossen the purse strings and make military duty really lucrative......which has always confused me if we spend so obscenley much on the military more than most other nations combined gdp why the hell couldn't they pay the soldiers, airman, marines, navy some really good money as an incentive? I think they could double the pay or triple it hell quaddrouple it and cut out some bullshiat weapon system or other bullshiat expense and have the happiest most content army in the field since alexander the great was on a campaign ......Screw it just decide on not building a few subs or carriers or planes and spend the money on the personel
 
2007-01-12 07:05:25 AM  
The dude in the picture

IS JOHN FARKING KERRY
 
2007-01-12 07:07:13 AM  
Finnley Wren
Four stars! Didn't think we had any of those.
Is he the only one?


Please tell us you're joking
 
2007-01-12 07:07:29 AM  
"Every one admits how praiseworthy it is in a prince to keep faith, and to live with integrity and not with craft. Nevertheless our experience has been that those princes who have done great things have held good faith of little account, and have known how to circumvent the intellect of men by craft, and in the end have overcome those who have relied on their word." - Machiavelli 'Il Principe'.
 
2007-01-12 07:08:24 AM  
Klyde: Please tell us you're joking

Err . . .no. Was that a stupid question?
 
2007-01-12 07:09:02 AM  
David Chu, the Pentagon's chief of personnel, said in an interview that he thinks Guard and Reserve members will be cheered by the decision to limit future mobilizations to 12 months. The fact that some with previous Iraq experience will end up spending more than 24 months on active duty is "no big deal," Chu said, because it has been "implicitly understood" by most that they eventually would go beyond 24 months.
 
2007-01-12 07:09:38 AM  
No cost estimate was provided, but officials said it would be at least several billion dollars.

Money to burn, people, money to burn. Just pack those cannons with dollar bills and light the fuse.
 
2007-01-12 07:11:04 AM  
Nelson laugh. I hope everyone who voted for this shrub and donated to the party gets their chance to serve and protect the oil.
Oh, wait, that's right, 'mercians don't care, the game is on!
 
2007-01-12 07:11:22 AM  
Finnley Wren: How in the hell did we manage to scrounge up 500,000 troops for Gulf War I and yet fifteen years later, 150,000 troops in Iraq has the U.S. Army stretched thin?

For one thing, we had the whole United Nations on our side in Gulf War I.

For Gulf War II (excuse me, "The Afghanistan and Iraq wars") (no, make that "Bush's Folly"), only the Brits were stupid enough to go along with us. And they are rapidly having second thoughts.
 
2007-01-12 07:13:42 AM  
Sue D. Nymme: For one thing, we had the whole United Nations on our side in Gulf War I.

Doesn't explain how the U.S. managed to put 500,000 of our own troops on the ground in 1991 and fifteen years later 150,000 has us stretched thin.

/I'll say it again
//some superpower we are
 
2007-01-12 07:18:03 AM  
Just try and draft me. I won't even need to run to Canadia (misspell on porpoise).

Is it AWOL if you leave after your contract is expired? Can they really change your contract with no consent from you while you're in the middle of your deployment?

Are there any countries with "brown people" in them that we have not invaded in the past 6 years?
/Run India run.
//Stupid muslim indians...
///I'm so ashamed of my country.
 
2007-01-12 07:18:19 AM  
Finnley Wren

Doesn't explain how the U.S. managed to put 500,000 of our own troops on the ground in 1991 and fifteen years later 150,000 has us stretched thin.


I think it has something to do with the timescales involved i.e. you can put 500,000 out there for a short time, but over an extended period of several years you're going to have 150,000 out in the field while a lot (I don't know how many) are going to be on leave.
 
2007-01-12 07:19:00 AM  
The Pentagon also announced it is proposing to Congress that the size of the Army be increased by 65,000, to 547,000 and that the Marine Corps, the smallest of the services, grow by 27,000, to 202,000, over the next five years. No cost estimate was provided, but officials said it would be at least several billion dollars.

Faaaaaaaaaaaaark

The fact that some with previous Iraq experience will end up spending more than 24 months on active duty is "no big deal," Chu said, because it has been "implicitly understood" by most that they eventually would go beyond 24 months.


No big deal? No big deal? Two of my former roommates and my best friend's now ex-boyfriend are over there. NO BIG DEAL?

Bite me, David Chu, Pentagon chief of personnel
 
2007-01-12 07:20:04 AM  
His best chance to get a draft was immediately after 9/11 .......he could have said we don't know the range or scope of the battle ahead and need all the resources we can have on hand at a moments notice ....and congress would have rolled over on its belly and the people in the streets would have cheered em on ....luckily for us he was too stupid to realize that ....I'd like to see him propose a draft though it would be interesting to see the reaction
 
2007-01-12 07:21:30 AM  
binnster: I think it has something to do with the timescales involved

You may be right, but it still doesn't quite add up. The number I recall hearing is something like we are supposed to have 1.6 million active members of the guard and reserve. To me, the numbers still don't had up. I think perhaps the emperor has no clothes.

/psst
//hey China . . .
/want Taiwan?
 
2007-01-12 07:23:28 AM  
[image from users.lmf.net too old to be available]

What if I say I'm crazy?
 
2007-01-12 07:23:39 AM  
Finnley Wren
I don't see this "500,000" troops you speak of. Do you have a source for that?
Also: We have been systematically stripping our military since the end of Gulf War I. You can go ahead and bbbbut Clinton on that one, he downsized the military alot during his terms, but then again he didn't put us in positions that need a large military.
BushII has been trying to increase the size of the military since the day he entered office, but nobody was going along with it until he started GulfwarII.

If we were fighting a war instead of committing suicide we could win with less than 10,000 troops.

/Also, that 150,000 only includes Iraq. We also have large numbers of troops in Afgan, Korea, Vietnam, Japan, Egypt, Syria, Pakistan, Israel, Britain, Germany, the ex-USSR, India, Somalia, nearly every other nation in Africa, etc. I'm sure we have more than 500,000 deployed overseas at this point.
 
2007-01-12 07:24:25 AM  
The fact that some with previous Iraq experience will end up spending more than 24 months on active duty is "no big deal," Chu said, because it has been "implicitly understood" by most that they eventually would go beyond 24 months.

Implicitly understood - after all, they put that disclaimer in the enlistment contract in microscopic writing that requires an electron microscope and a team of high-powered LA lawyers to decipher.
 
2007-01-12 07:26:32 AM  
Amaranth: I don't see this "500,000" troops you speak of. Do you have a source for that?

I hate using it as a source, but it was the quickest.

From WikiPedia: US troops represented 74% of the coalition's 660,000 troops in Iraq.
 
2007-01-12 07:28:18 AM  
Democratic nations do not start wars. This was never a "republican" war, and Bush Jr. was never more than the obnoxious empty shirt waved by the clique of robber baron families who have been using America's coffers to drive the largest "private capital" spending spree in history.

History will treat this episode as irrelevant. The war on Iraq has done what it was supposed to: create the space for a permanent US military presence in the heart of the Middle East, allow Saudis to live without infidels on their lands, and give the US control over the Middle East's future water supply, and thus power over the region for the next 25 years.

The US will not leave Iraq for a long time, maybe decades. The strategic problem is how to make the failure of a political solution look like simple bumbling. The military problem is how to maximise the benefits of such a failure.
 
2007-01-12 07:30:19 AM  
LudditeAndroid

I know you're angry but please don't do that with the tags anymore.
 
2007-01-12 07:30:52 AM  
If they don't want to go all they have to do is pose for playboy.
 
Displayed 50 of 402 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report