(with reduced benefits from the bill being considered)

I'm not saying you shouldn't participate.
but I shouldn't be...

I presented one argument or one side.

You presented another.

I'm not necessarily choosing a side.

and on that note.
Have a good day sir.

Wrong again.


The Republican Bill:

It pays benefits on an increasing scale based upon time in service, so the longer the vet has served before retiring, the more benefits he or she receives. This is far superior to the Webb bill, because it encourages enlisted members to stay in military service longer.

Non-commissioned officers are the backbone of the American military. We give our NCOs unprecedented command authority, setting us apart from, and making us far more victorious than, the other militaries of the world.


It allows the veteran to transfer the educational benefits from himself to his spouse or children, thus helping veteran families pay for college eduction for their kids.



The Democrats want to give full benefits after only three years instead of an incentive based bill. This will cause long term re-enistments to suffer, and hurt the military, which is exactly what the Democrats have historically tried to do.

In other words, it gives less benefits.

Be well, friend.

I just knew there would be the talking points on display for this one. I can understand retention as an important issue when considering a vote on a G.I. bill. It has been said that during world war two we offered very much similar incentive; why would this not be good now? The whole allure of an incentive for Military service is the ability to achieve a higher education where as in any other situation; they would not have this ability. First things first; how about paying those with benefits before discussing blowing off the next generation! How may stories have you read about people not getting their current benefits promised or being kicked off base for not meeting criteria for benefits that these poor souls thought were part of the package? It’s funny how now the People who Support the troops can be dismissed with a terrible notion that something can cost too much in regards to our fallen hero's!? The Hypocrisy is so smelly and thick, I am sick to my stomach!

__________________
EVERY WORD YOU SAY IS A DOOR WAY TO YOU!

How come we're willing to waste (and I do mean WASTE) billions and billions of dollars on reconstruction contractors, overpriced administrators, security goons and massively corrupt Iraqi politicians and officials, but suddenly we can't find a few billion for the men and women we put in harm's way for years, especially when we extended their tours of duty in the war zone and decreased their time back in the US? Get your priorities straight, people!

As for getting too many people dropping out after only one tour in the forces, I would bet you'd get a lot more people signing up for a tour of duty as well. How is this a bad thing?

Nope, no reduction.

Actually, yes, if they're not doling out benefits as early, that's a reduction.

Yes.

Less.

The purpose of the military is not to provide GIs with an education or a job or any other benefits you can dream up. The purpose of the military is to protect and defend the Constitution. That's it.

Liberals want to take the military and turn it into some kind of weird scholarship/job program. Well, it ain't. There's line between an incentive to join and an incentive to quit. This bill crosses that line. This bill serves not to strengthen the military, but weakens it.

It's all about emotions. Nevermind logic. Someone give me an argument that does not rely on emotion. Tell me how and why this bill is different/better than the benefits currently offered. Tell me how this bill will improve our military effectiveness. How about showing some facts instead of the whiney-baby "you don't care" crap? Come on. Many of you are 100% positive that this bill is great. WHY?

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.