Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ansel12
“Military families have to be accommodated, sometimes they live in unpleasant places where they have to live on post with their own school system, health care, and base security and social life.

Travel can be frequent and being an extended part of the military makes that uprooting and relocating, even in foreign lands, easier for a family.

The Indian fighting army had base accommodations, and that was a situation where some wives carried pistols to kill the children and themselves if capture was imminent, and even in 1780 laws were being passed for wives by the Continental Congress.

What alternative is there to families living together?”

I've heard it suggested by some military families that, the frequent rate at which the military moves personnel around is to prevent acclimation to a given area, and thus unwillingness to attack it upon federal orders. (Something that didn't normally happen in the “Civil War”)

If we are maintaining the same bases around the u.s. and world for long periods of time and those bases retain more or less the same basic manpower requirements, why is it that we should move so much of the military around so frequently?

Why not try to save money by keeping personnel where their needed until they are no longer needed, and then first looking elsewhere in the same base for the next assignment before moving them to anther base.

I understand that many of our basis around the world are not in the best locations, some are places you don't want to leave the base, while others still are places you can't take your family.

In theses situations I can see a rotation based system, but bases in situations like this in general I think basis should be largely temporary. At least to the extent that we can't call the area home.
The point is if we can't make a home, if the population is too hostilities we should be weary about keeping a base there.

In my nonprofessional opinion being acclimated to the local area is a vital component to defending that area.

Finally I have great issue with the lengthy tour of duty demands. I think this is mostly so that the military can recoup their training and services costs.

I think if we drop most of the veterans benefits for new solderer and instead pay them a much higher salary to make up the difference, we could also shorten the commitment time. Thus allowing solderers who's family situation changes to adapt their life better.

Being a solderer in this country should be less a career and more a job. In which you can get in and out of based upon needs of both the employee(solderers) and employer(Government).

57 posted on 04/02/2013 3:54:50 PM PDT by Monorprise (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]


To: Monorprise

I am a little stunned.

You don’t just not know much about the military, you know absolutely nothing about it.

Talking to you about the military is senseless and would not serve any purpose, you are way beyond ignorant, not above nutty conspiracy theories based on ignorance, but definitely way beyond ignorance, for you to have become an adult yet be so ignorant of the subject, indicates that learning about it is beyond your capabilities and outside of your interests.


58 posted on 04/02/2013 5:19:10 PM PDT by ansel12 (The lefts most effective quote-I'm libertarian on social issues, but conservative on economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson