Awol Sticky? (Mods...?)

[iescaped]

What is the name of your state? Doesn't matter

Is it possible to make a thread "sticky" on this forum? I thought that if we gave the basic principles of the whole AWOL issue, then people (badapple) would only need to field exception type questions.

AWOL Basics - Leave while under TRADOC, stay away til DFR'd (30 days), turn self in...PROBABLY sent home in week with an OTH.

Perm. party may be a little different, however while I was at Sill, there were a few "PP" soldiers that got the same deal, your in, your out, Uncle Sam doesn't waste any more money on you.

As a side note, I find it odd that people are concerned with the specifics of turning yourself in...it's gonna be gamble, any way you cut it. Smoking or not, details or not...you want out, you'll probably get it...be happy!

**Disclaimer** Having gone through the process almost 10 months ago...it was a huge mistake, would not recommend it, and tell anybody that just "wants out" to stick with it.

[SHORTY LONG]

30 May 06

[iescaped] though I could not grasp all of your posting; I did grasp the part that you were discharged with an "oth" and would not advise it for anyone; and to stick it out! I support this in your input; and ask myself, if possible since you only been out for 10 months maybe you can get yourself polished and take your 214 to a Recruiter and try and get back in. Only a suggestion. Shorty

[patriotam22]

Originally Posted by iescaped

What is the name of your state? Doesn't matter

Is it possible to make a thread "sticky" on this forum? I thought that if we gave the basic principles of the whole AWOL issue, then people (badapple) would only need to field exception type questions.

AWOL Basics - Leave while under TRADOC, stay away til DFR'd (30 days), turn self in...PROBABLY sent home in week with an OTH.

Perm. party may be a little different, however while I was at Sill, there were a few "PP" soldiers that got the same deal, your in, your out, Uncle Sam doesn't waste any more money on you.

As a side note, I find it odd that people are concerned with the specifics of turning yourself in...it's gonna be gamble, any way you cut it. Smoking or not, details or not...you want out, you'll probably get it...be happy!

**Disclaimer** Having gone through the process almost 10 months ago...it was a huge mistake, would not recommend it, and tell anybody that just "wants out" to stick with it.

How about you elaborate on that. Why was it a mistake? Why don't you suggest it? What has happened in the last 10 months that brought on this feeling. I'm sure alot of the current AWOL'ers would be interested in the reasons why rather than just don't do it.

[Jaybird]

This is not for iescaped.....but any one looking to go AWOL during at time of WAR, cant the shoot you for that these days???
You choose to raise your hand and defend the constitution**************.need any more reasons.....
HONOR,DUTY,COUNTRY**************

[iescaped]

Here is my elaborate...er...elaboration.

The military is not for everybody, I think we all get that. Safe to say however, most people COULD get by, counting days, whatever...until that good ole' ETS date shows it's face. (Kind of like the groundhog and his shadow now-a-days from what I hear...) Subsequently, credit cards are not for everybody either. Most people COULD get by, paying a few bucks over the minimum each month, to bring that balance down to zero. Making sense yet? You signed the deal brother.

The military is the only place in the world you will have a chance to laugh and cry in the same hour, change socks 8 times a day, get dirty, stay dirty and get more dirty. You will have front row seats to the worst food in the world, the worst pay in the world, equipment that most of the time works, but sometimes doesn't. Part of the deal also includes a lovely jail cell sized room, roommate (or 12) included! The view will be another "uglier than hell" building or sand...NOT YOUR CHOICE! And NO, they don't take requests. You will stand in lines that make American Idol seem like a grocery store checkout isle, and the best part is you get ALL OF THIS, plus you'll be told you did it ALL wrong anyway. Why bother?

Surprise! I have the answer! You bother because you went to the recruiter, because you signed your name, because you stood in a small room, with some other rag-tag *******s and took an oath to defend the constitution of this wonderful country. You'll do it because you will meet people you never believe could exsist, visit places you've only seen on TV. You'll most likely be shot at, and shoot back, you'll find inner strength and courage you thought you had, but weren't QUITE sure until the time came. You'll be proud of yourself when it happens. You'll do it because these *******s you met at Day 0 become your battle buddies, and suddenly race disappears, religion disappears, EVERYTHING disappears, because when it comes down to the "come down", you need to find a way to get you and your ******* buddy the hell out of here. And come hell or high water, that is your only goal in life. (Only after it's over, it will suddenly hit you that you did it all for the *******...) Perhaps, your ******* buddy will be saying that about you. After ALL that is done, you'll realize that you did it for all those reasons, and the ones I haven't even said. And you'll smile when you get off that airplane, and people you've never seen before are shaking your hand, WWII vets, whom have "BEEN THERE" are standing there and saluting you, mothers are trying to hug you, and everybody else is clapping and cheering. You smile real big (maybe somewhat flustered) as you turn around to look for some one else. It's only you. And as you see that little girl or little boy playing in the street, or at the playground, you'll say "My God, it has all been worth it." And then you'll cry.

[kwohl]

Originally Posted by iescaped

Here is my elaborate...er...elaboration.

The military is not for everybody, I think we all get that. Safe to say however, most people COULD get by, counting days, whatever...until that good ole' ETS date shows it's face. (Kind of like the groundhog and his shadow now-a-days from what I hear...) Subsequently, credit cards are not for everybody either. Most people COULD get by, paying a few bucks over the minimum each month, to bring that balance down to zero. Making sense yet? You signed the deal brother.

The military is the only place in the world you will have a chance to laugh and cry in the same hour, change socks 8 times a day, get dirty, stay dirty and get more dirty. You will have front row seats to the worst food in the world, the worst pay in the world, equipment that most of the time works, but sometimes doesn't. Part of the deal also includes a lovely jail cell sized room, roommate (or 12) included! The view will be another "uglier than hell" building or sand...NOT YOUR CHOICE! And NO, they don't take requests. You will stand in lines that make American Idol seem like a grocery store checkout isle, and the best part is you get ALL OF THIS, plus you'll be told you did it ALL wrong anyway. Why bother?

Surprise! I have the answer! You bother because you went to the recruiter, because you signed your name, because you stood in a small room, with some other rag-tag *******s and took an oath to defend the constitution of this wonderful country. You'll do it because you will meet people you never believe could exsist, visit places you've only seen on TV. You'll most likely be shot at, and shoot back, you'll find inner strength and courage you thought you had, but weren't QUITE sure until the time came. You'll be proud of yourself when it happens. You'll do it because these *******s you met at Day 0 become your battle buddies, and suddenly race disappears, religion disappears, EVERYTHING disappears, because when it comes down to the "come down", you need to find a way to get you and your ******* buddy the hell out of here. And come hell or high water, that is your only goal in life. (Only after it's over, it will suddenly hit you that you did it all for the *******...) Perhaps, your ******* buddy will be saying that about you. After ALL that is done, you'll realize that you did it for all those reasons, and the ones I haven't even said. And you'll smile when you get off that airplane, and people you've never seen before are shaking your hand, WWII vets, whom have "BEEN THERE" are standing there and saluting you, mothers are trying to hug you, and everybody else is clapping and cheering. You smile real big (maybe somewhat flustered) as you turn around to look for some one else. It's only you. And as you see that little girl or little boy playing in the street, or at the playground, you'll say "My God, it has all been worth it." And then you'll cry.

you get to kill people and you cant justify why your killing them or why your there, why the war is happening. oh hell ya you get to blast those mother ****ers to hell and maybe if your close enough you can watch them die, watch em bleed. and why are you there? why are we fighting? ya just keep telling yourself its for "FREEDOM" and old glory. we're fighting for jack in iraq. its not right to see our brothers die in iraq for nothing. i see mothers crying over their sons/daughters killed in a combat zone and i just cant help but think that theyre crying because they just dont know WHY. WHY. it makes me wanna cry when i see the faces of the fallen. its wrong what they have died for. please please oh think about your actions, why cant people just think and question.

if i offended anyone im sorry

-kevin

[ARMY-HELP]

Originally Posted by kwohl

you get to kill people and you cant justify why your killing them or why your there, why the war is happening. oh hell ya you get to blast those mother ****ers to hell and maybe if your close enough you can watch them die, watch em bleed. and why are you there? why are we fighting? ya just keep telling yourself its for "FREEDOM" and old glory. we're fighting for jack in iraq. its not right to see our brothers die in iraq for nothing. i see mothers crying over their sons/daughters killed in a combat zone and i just cant help but think that theyre crying because they just dont know WHY. WHY. it makes me wanna cry when i see the faces of the fallen. its wrong what they have died for. please please oh think about your actions, why cant people just think and question.

if i offended anyone im sorry

-kevin

Kevin,

A Soldier fights because he has to,it's his job to stay loyal to his country. He knows not of politics,or rite,or wrong.(wich mind you is only a point of view).His mission is all that matters.

Thats the definition of a Soldier.

All that you mention above means nothing to him and when it's all said and done he might think diffrently but he still did what he had to do when he had to do it.

[badapple40]

This is my (an old-- well not that old) officer's perspective:


I was born in the 60s. It was a turbulent time. And as I came of age and graduated high school, it was the height of the cold war, the early 80s. And we had the big bad Russians to worry about. I went to the Air Force Academy for the free education. Not thinking about the obligations that I was taking on in exchange for that education. I was not unlike 1000 of my classmates. But my education transformed me into a professional officer. Who knew what his job was. The military underwent a drastic transformation from 1972 to 1980, and an equally drastic transformation throughout the 1980s. I watched as classmates, friends, former roommates, were killed. And I knew that they died for a cause greater than any temporary political policy or movement -- they died furthering our national interest.

We learned at the Academy that the military is but one arm of foreign policy. When the negotiations, back room talks, and embargo's don't work, we use our military to further our national policy. It is necessary to add legitimacy to our politicians and statesmen who deal with folks like the Chineese and North Koreans, who only respect military might.

The military isn't always going to be liberating concentration camps, as in WWII, or necessarily fighting the tyrannical south american dictator. And its mission has changed over the years, from being a force maintained for deterrence purposes to being actively engaged in modern warfare, where the distinction between the front lines and rear support are far less defined.

Our foreign policy has changed again under the current CinC, from being reactionary with our military to be proactive. The policy has been decried at home and abroad. But for the soldier, sailor, marine, and airman, none of that matters. The oath was not to support and defend one political party, or one individual president. Rather, the oath was to support and defend the constitution. Which means following the lawful orders of the CinC. To be frank with you, I feel better about our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan (which had congressional support) than I ever did about Bosnia or Somalia under Clinton (with no such mandate) -- simply from the perspective of whether the CinC's orders to deploy, fight, and win were lawful.

The soldier does not have the luxury of only supporting the wars or causes he or she chooses to fight. Everytime someone makes the statement that AWOL is OK because they believe war is wrong misses the point. The soldier's role is not to question any given war or orders. That is the politician's job. The soldier's job is merely to follow the lawful orders of those appointed over him or her. In that regard, these GI Rights wackos miss the point completely (to the extent they encourage AWOL).

If every soldier who questioned an order was allowed a "free pass," we wouldn't have much of a military or much of a national defense at all. Our military exists to further national policy (polular or unpopular). Of course, if the American people wanted change, they are free to vote out the existing office holder and achieve that change (at the next election).

The officer's role (as I see it) is slightly different. We have the job of making sure the orders coming down are lawful. For instance, if the CinC ordered the bombing of California, the land of fruits and nuts, to deal with those insidious liberal wackos on the left coast, I could not pass that order down. Our job is be the check on the orders to make sure they are lawful. And our job is to make suggestions or ask questions up the chain, especially if we believe that there are points or repurcussions that have not been considered. But if told to charge ahead, that is what we do.

And, if lawful, our job is to implement the orders in the best way possible. But, again, our job is not to undermine or refuse to carry out lawful orders because we disagree with the policy behind them.

The comments by some on this board that it is OK to go AWOL because of current foreign policy or that we should blame the current CinC for AWOL or the military of today is narrow minded and dangerous. The military's job is to carry out orders. The voters job is to choose leaders who reflect our societal values.

Originally Posted by badapple40

This is my (an old-- well not that old) officer's perspective:


I was born in the 60s. It was a turbulent time. And as I came of age and graduated high school, it was the height of the cold war, the early 80s. And we had the big bad Russians to worry about. I went to the Air Force Academy for the free education. Not thinking about the obligations that I was taking on in exchange for that education. I was not unlike 1000 of my classmates. But my education transformed me into a professional officer. Who knew what his job was. The military underwent a drastic transformation from 1972 to 1980, and an equally drastic transformation throughout the 1980s. I watched as classmates, friends, former roommates, were killed. And I knew that they died for a cause greater than any temporary political policy or movement -- they died furthering our national interest.

We learned at the Academy that the military is but one arm of foreign policy. When the negotiations, back room talks, and embargo's don't work, we use our military to further our national policy. It is necessary to add legitimacy to our politicians and statesmen who deal with folks like the Chineese and North Koreans, who only respect military might.

The military isn't always going to be liberating concentration camps, as in WWII, or necessarily fighting the tyrannical south american dictator. And its mission has changed over the years, from being a force maintained for deterrence purposes to being actively engaged in modern warfare, where the distinction between the front lines and rear support are far less defined.

Our foreign policy has changed again under the current CinC, from being reactionary with our military to be proactive. The policy has been decried at home and abroad. But for the soldier, sailor, marine, and airman, none of that matters. The oath was not to support and defend one political party, or one individual president. Rather, the oath was to support and defend the constitution. Which means following the lawful orders of the CinC. To be frank with you, I feel better about our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan (which had congressional support) than I ever did about Bosnia or Somalia under Clinton (with no such mandate) -- simply from the perspective of whether the CinC's orders to deploy, fight, and win were lawful.

The soldier does not have the luxury of only supporting the wars or causes he or she chooses to fight. Everytime someone makes the statement that AWOL is OK because they believe war is wrong misses the point. The soldier's role is not to question any given war or orders. That is the politician's job. The soldier's job is merely to follow the lawful orders of those appointed over him or her. In that regard, these GI Rights wackos miss the point completely (to the extent they encourage AWOL).

If every soldier who questioned an order was allowed a "free pass," we wouldn't have much of a military or much of a national defense at all. Our military exists to further national policy (polular or unpopular). Of course, if the American people wanted change, they are free to vote out the existing office holder and achieve that change (at the next election).

The officer's role (as I see it) is slightly different. We have the job of making sure the orders coming down are lawful. For instance, if the CinC ordered the bombing of California, the land of fruits and nuts, to deal with those insidious liberal wackos on the left coast, I could not pass that order down. Our job is be the check on the orders to make sure they are lawful. And our job is to make suggestions or ask questions up the chain, especially if we believe that there are points or repurcussions that have not been considered. But if told to charge ahead, that is what we do.

And, if lawful, our job is to implement the orders in the best way possible. But, again, our job is not to undermine or refuse to carry out lawful orders because we disagree with the policy behind them.

The comments by some on this board that it is OK to go AWOL because of current foreign policy or that we should blame the current CinC for AWOL or the military of today is narrow minded and dangerous. The military's job is to carry out orders. The voters job is to choose leaders who reflect our societal values.

Well if we are going start posting philosophy:

As a person who also was born in the sixties during all that free love, Charlie Manson, peace, flowers and liberal hippie crap was in its infancy, and was brought up by a single mom who decided that leaving her conservative italian, money making husband was cool and chic I also have a perspective on the subject of military thinking and it does not differ very much from Badapple's. However I do take exception to a few things.

[quote=badapple40]
The soldier's job is merely to follow the lawful orders of those appointed over him or her. [quote=badapple40]


The military does not (or so they say) nor should they support the idea of soldiers merely obeying orders without putting some thought into weither they are right or wrong. Now I do understand that a soldier should understand he/she better be dam sure if they are going to question a officers orders.

Linsey England didn't question her orders and thought they where appropriate. We all see what that got her. We could (knowing this board we will) go on and on.


So if we want soldiers who are individual thinkers then we should expect them to think. If we let them think (and we should) then they are going to have differing opions as to what is right and what is wrong.

So are we victims of our own creation (democracy and free thinking)?

I understand the idea that our military members should do what there told when there told to do it. I understand that they have given up there constitutional rights so that they may defend them for us. I understand lots of things that I did not understand when I was 18 years old!

Our military needs to understand that too. Our recruiters should be brutally honest when bringing kids on board. They need to change the quota system so recruiters will not behave so recklessly with the youth. Perhaps a system that rewards recruiters by the numbers of kids they enlist or commission that actually stay versus the ones they recruit that go AWOL. They (the kids, aka recruits) need to know that everything they learned throughout there young lives needs to be rethought.

We bring them up. We teach them to read. We teach them American History. We teach them the declaration of independence. We teach them the constitution. We teach them to THINK.

What we don't teach them is unquestioned obedience.

[badapple40]

[quote=thepizzaguy]Well if we are going start posting philosophy:

As a person who also was born in the sixties during all that free love, Charlie Manson, peace, flowers and liberal hippie crap was in its infancy, and was brought up by a single mom who decided that leaving her conservative italian, money making husband was cool and chic I also have a perspective on the subject of military thinking and it does not differ very much from Badapple's. However I do take exception to a few things.

[quote=badapple40]
The soldier's job is merely to follow the lawful orders of those appointed over him or her.

Originally Posted by badapple40

The military does not (or so they say) nor should they support the idea of soldiers merely obeying orders without putting some thought into weither they are right or wrong. Now I do understand that a soldier should understand he/she better be dam sure if they are going to question a officers orders.

Linsey England didn't question her orders and thought they where appropriate. We all see what that got her. We could (knowing this board we will) go on and on.


So if we want soldiers who are individual thinkers then we should expect them to think. If we let them think (and we should) then they are going to have differing opions as to what is right and what is wrong.

So are we victims of our own creation (democracy and free thinking)?

I understand the idea that our military members should do what there told when there told to do it. I understand that they have given up there constitutional rights so that they may defend them for us. I understand lots of things that I did not understand when I was 18 years old!

Our military needs to understand that too. Our recruiters should be brutally honest when bringing kids on board. They need to change the quota system so recruiters will not behave so recklessly with the youth. Perhaps a system that rewards recruiters by the numbers of kids they enlist or commission that actually stay versus the ones they recruit that go AWOL. They (the kids, aka recruits) need to know that everything they learned throughout there young lives needs to be rethought.

We bring them up. We teach them to read. We teach them American History. We teach them the declaration of independence. We teach them the constitution. We teach them to THINK.

What we don't teach them is unquestioned obedience.

And what you missed there was:

The soldier's job is merely to follow the lawful orders of those appointed over him or her.

England messed up because her orders were not lawful. Just like the soldiers at My Lai. Nevertheless, that does not give anyone the right to question or decide not to follow an order that they don't like, but is lawful.

[quote=badapple40][quote=thepizzaguy]Well if we are going start posting philosophy:

As a person who also was born in the sixties during all that free love, Charlie Manson, peace, flowers and liberal hippie crap was in its infancy, and was brought up by a single mom who decided that leaving her conservative italian, money making husband was cool and chic I also have a perspective on the subject of military thinking and it does not differ very much from Badapple's. However I do take exception to a few things.

Originally Posted by badapple40

The soldier's job is merely to follow the lawful orders of those appointed over him or her.

And what you missed there was:

The soldier's job is merely to follow the lawful orders of those appointed over him or her.

England messed up because her orders were not lawful. Just like the soldiers at My Lai. Nevertheless, that does not give anyone the right to question or decide not to follow an order that they don't like, but is lawful.

lawyers love that word "merely" when desrcibing the layman or uneducated.

My closing arguements: Merely would suggest merry is not as merely as it seems. I don't want people taking orders merely because they think they are lawful.

No offense colonel: I was just merely pointing out that we bring our children up to think, rather than to merely accept lawful orders.

[iescaped]

lol pizzaguy...

gotta give you that one...


[quote=thepizzaguy][quote=badapple40]

Originally Posted by thepizzaguy

Well if we are going start posting philosophy:

As a person who also was born in the sixties during all that free love, Charlie Manson, peace, flowers and liberal hippie crap was in its infancy, and was brought up by a single mom who decided that leaving her conservative italian, money making husband was cool and chic I also have a perspective on the subject of military thinking and it does not differ very much from Badapple's. However I do take exception to a few things.



lawyers love that word "merely" when desrcibing the layman or uneducated.

My closing arguements: Merely would suggest merry is not as merely as it seems. I don't want people taking orders merely because they think they are lawful.

No offense colonel: I was just merely pointing out that we bring our children up to think, rather than to merely accept lawful orders.