English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Not all personal but the troops that have combat MOS's, what are your thoughts?

2007-03-16 06:27:25 · 20 answers · asked by down 1 in Politics & Government Military

20 answers

Yes, most defiantly.

These people were willing to give their lives for this country, and should be compensated greatly for it.

I was watching Black Hawk Down a while ago, and it occurred to me that: The actors in that movie probably made more money portraying the characters than the real people who lived it and the movie was based on.

2007-03-16 06:34:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Not all troops in combat have combat mos's, that would only cause problems among the ranks, you have combat and combat support, you are either one or the other, and both are trained for the mission the same way, so what you are asking is should we pay an infantryman more money than the commo guy or mechanic on the same mission just because he holds a certain mos, I would say no, they got extremely high bonuses for enlisting in the combat arms field to begin with, and some of them never see any action at all, so why pay the extra. It looks like everyone missed the question, sure top dollar is good but not between the troops, thats the question

2007-03-16 13:48:46 · answer #2 · answered by sofmatty 4 · 0 0

Hey ! push that one through, I was in the fighting infantry all across France, Germany, Luxemburg, Belgium, Austria, and into Czechoslovakia. Six years oveseas without a break, right in the front line infantry all the way. Boy ! I'll be rich.
Answering your question - - - NO. Military service is not for money. It's to earn the right to say, " I'm an American ".

2007-03-16 13:59:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Yes and many of them are on food stamps and welfare. And when they come back alive with missing body parts..they are kept in a horrible hospital. We should not expect these brave men and woman risk their lives for us and we treat them like street people. Bush is so worried about the message we send when we voice an end to this civil war. Bush's lack of concern for our troop sends a clear and loud message just like Katrina.

2007-03-16 13:37:19 · answer #4 · answered by RORO 2 · 0 2

I dont' know how this ZH guy can say they are disposable. That is horrible. My husband is over there fighting so people like you can say he is disposable. Well he's not disposable to me. We don't care what he gets paid as long as he comes home. THese guys aren't there by choice. They are there because someone gave them orders to be there. They aren't there for the money either. YEs, they may tell you they want more money (who doesn't) but I think very few of them would actually complain about the amount they are getting.

2007-03-16 13:38:51 · answer #5 · answered by starchild2000_98 3 · 2 2

That would partially defeat the purpose of war. War against another nation isn't just the pursuit of more natural resources and new markets, rather it is also a form of class warfare against the warring nation's own underclass.

2007-03-16 13:37:44 · answer #6 · answered by AZ123 4 · 0 1

I don't know what "top dollar" would be; but I would be happy if they earned a tax-free income since they are already being paid with monies collected by taxes. It's like being taxed twice. I agree, that only those actually serving in a direct combat-oriented mission. (I am aware that those serving overseas earn tax-free income, but feel that it should apply to a wider group, i.e., those rotating to/from war-time scenarios).

2007-03-16 13:37:35 · answer #7 · answered by jellyjulie 2 · 0 2

I'm content with my pay.

If you raise the pay to top dollar, then you are going to get a lot of people in the military who do not want to be there. They will be there only for the money. And I don't want someone like that fighting next to me. When crap hits the fan, all they are going to think about is "man I need to live through this so I can collect my pay check" instead of "man, my brothers need me!"

One last thing.....When we are in a combat zone, we are exempt from taxes.

2007-03-16 13:31:02 · answer #8 · answered by SGT 3 · 4 3

Our troops should be paid livable, comparable wages with compensations for actual combat and other hazardous duties, but nothing extraordinary.

You are not there to get rich, but you're not there for poverty either.

2007-03-16 14:04:35 · answer #9 · answered by SnowWebster2 5 · 2 1

Ina perfect world they should but with our current budget people in the armed services get compensated at least adequately. I would rather they spend it on supplies and armor more than fatter paychecks, we signed up because we wanted to win this thing and what we need is more armor and supplies.

2007-03-16 13:37:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers