U.S. military is discharging service members who refuse to get vaccinated : Coronavirus Updates : NPR

  
Via:  Kavika  •  5 months ago  •  115 comments

By:   NPR. org

U.S. military is discharging service members who refuse to get vaccinated : Coronavirus Updates : NPR
Military officials say that, after months of warnings, they have begun disciplinary actions. The Army has reprimanded 2,700 soldiers and said it will begin discharge proceedings in the new year.

Sponsored by group SiNNERs and ButtHeads

SiNNERs and ButtHeads


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Updated December 17, 20214:47 PM ET Originally published December 17, 20213:44 PM ET

Matthew S. Schwartz

Twitter Enlarge this image

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin speaks during a media briefing at the Pentagon last month. The military branches have begun discharging people who refuse to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Alex Brandon/AP hide caption

toggle caption Alex Brandon/AP

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin speaks during a media briefing at the Pentagon last month. The military branches have begun discharging people who refuse to get vaccinated against COVID-19.

Alex Brandon/AP

Members of the U.S. military who haven't been vaccinated against COVID-19 are starting to face the consequences. Military officials announced this week that, after months of warnings, they have begun disciplinary actions — including discharge.

The Air Force was the first of the branches to announce dismissals, saying Tuesday it had discharged 27 people who refused to get the vaccine. On Thursday, the Marines said it had discharged 103 troops. The Army has reprimanded 2,700 soldiers and said it will begin discharge proceedings in the new year. And the Navy this week told commanders to start "administrative separations" for "vaccine refusers."

Coronavirus Updates


The Pentagon Has Moved Toward Making Vaccines Mandatory For Service Members


But the vast majority of the armed services have followed orders. In the Navy, 98.4% of its force fully vaccinated, according to the Associated Press. The Air Force says 97.5% have received at least one shot. Army officials said that 98% of active-duty forces have received at least one dose of the vaccine, while 96% — nearly half a million people — are fully vaccinated. About 95% of Marine Corps forces have gotten at least one shot.

That still leaves potentially thousands of active-duty soldiers who might be forced out in the coming weeks or months. Although that would slightly reduce the size of the military, the Pentagon says it's important to keep that in perspective.

In the Army's case, for instance, less than 1% of the force has refused the vaccine. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin is most concerned with "the readiness of the force and the importance of the vaccine," Pentagon press secretary John Kirby told reporters. Getting the vaccine, he said, is "the best way to protect themselves and their units.

The Coronavirus Crisis


New CDC guidance encourages more testing to limit school quarantines


The Pentagon began requiring members of the military to get vaccinated in late summer. There are "active discussions" within the Pentagon about requiring booster shots as well, Kirby said. The booster shot provides strong protection against the omicron variant of the coronavirus, medical officials have said.

Thousands of troops across the services have asked for exemptions from the vaccine requirement, some of which have been granted. Medical exemptions are often available when, for instance, someone is allergic to a vaccine ingredient, or has an underlying health condition that could cause adverse reactions.

At least 12,000 service members have asked for religious exemptions, none of which have yet been granted. Religious exemptions are "always rare," Kirby told reporters earlier this month.

"This has absolutely nothing to do with trampling on the religious liberties of our men and women in uniform," he said. "It's about a military medical requirement to keep them safe, to keep their family safe, to keep their units safe."

The Pentagon has also required all National Guard members to get vaccinated against the coronavirus, but some states have pushed back. Republican governors from five states wrote to the defense secretary this week arguing that the Pentagon didn't have the authority to discharge Guard members for refusing the vaccine.

  • COVID-19 vaccine
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Flipboard
  • Email

Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Kavika     5 months ago

Trolling, taunting, and off-topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve the continuity of this seed.

I have three relatives that are on active duty (two are lifers, 10th Mountain and 173rd Airborne) the other in his first enlistment in the AF....They all have both doses of the vaccine, they were not going to risk their health, their families' health, or their buddies, not to mention their careers.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1  devangelical  replied to  Kavika @1    5 months ago

since when has our armed forces become a democracy. they all knew that when they signed on the line to join. any refusal of a directive is clear insubordination and grounds for discharge or worse. get the anti-vaxers out and continue up the brass chain of command to remove any and all that think the way they do. keep our military strong by eradicating the people that have now shown to be a liability to it. a general discharge is a gift to that trash.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  devangelical @1.1    5 months ago

People sometimes forget that when they sign on that dotted line their ass no longer belongs to them. There's a reason they are called GIs...government issue

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.1    5 months ago

Anyone refusing to get vaccinated should be discharged and lose all benefits.  

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
1.2  SteevieGee  replied to  Kavika @1    5 months ago

It's hard to claim a religious exemption when you've already let them vaccinate you for everything from measles and polio to parvo.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
2  bbl-1    5 months ago

Can't follow the rules?  Then leave.

Do not care about others and your duty?  Then leave.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  bbl-1 @2    5 months ago
Can't follow the rules?  Then leave. Do not care about others and your duty?  Then leave.

That's it.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
2.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  bbl-1 @2    5 months ago

In many cases, young soldiers are there for the MOS training, a paycheck, free housing, free food, free medical/dental, and educational benefits only.  They serve the minimum time required to achieve this.  They don't give a shit about their oaths or serving the country, only themselves.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
3  Tacos!    5 months ago

Any word on what level of discharge these folks will receive? Imagine not only throwing away your career over a vaccine, but benefits as well.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Tacos! @3    5 months ago

A few days ago there was an article that those with enough time in to retire will be allowed to retire with an honorable discharge those that didn't would receive a general discharge. I'm not sure if that is all services or not.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
3.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  Kavika @3.1    5 months ago

I think General is still ok in that respect. You pretty much need an OTH, bad conduct or dishonorable to be barred from benefits. Still, it doesn’t look or feel good. At minimum, it may make potential employees look upon them with some trepidation.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.2  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Tacos! @3.1.1    5 months ago

There is quite a bit of difference in discharges, and in the general discharge. Here is a pretty good link explaining.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.1.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Kavika @3.1    5 months ago

I am an old Army S-1 rat and those who can't retire will receive general discharges.  I am betting that new regs will be put into effect to cover this specifically.

 
 
 
Freefaller
Professor Participates
3.1.4  Freefaller  replied to  Tacos! @3.1.1    5 months ago
At minimum, it may make potential employers look upon them with some trepidation.

From what I hear if they are unvaccinated there won't be all that many potential employers to begin with

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.1.5  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Kavika @3.1    5 months ago

i read pretty much the same , about to retire or those that are coming up on end of enlistment on current contract , get an honorable , those that have a year or more on their contract of enlistment will get a general .

 about the only type of discharge that even matters anymore is the dishonorable or bad conduct one , all the rest dont mean a thing in the real world .

 
 
 
Gsquared
Junior Principal
4  Gsquared    5 months ago

They have no excuse for not getting vaccinated.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Gsquared @4    5 months ago

Exactly, and the military is showing them that it is unacceptable.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5  seeder  Kavika     5 months ago

I wonder what some of our NT vets have to say or think about this.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
5.1  Snuffy  replied to  Kavika @5    5 months ago

As a member of the military, you have voluntarily given up some personal rights for the good of the unit. In basic (oh so many years ago now) we lined up and were marched thru rooms to receive all sorts of vaccines and immunizations without any though given of personal rights as we knew that sometimes the needs of the military are higher than our personal issues. I don't know the policy the military would follow for those who are allergic to a component of the vaccine, if they would remain in service or receive a medical discharge or what. But the basic thing is that if higher authority as ordered that all service members receive the vaccine then that's what the plan is. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.1.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Snuffy @5.1    5 months ago

Agreed Snuffy, I lost count of the number of vaccines I had in my time in the military. You did not have a choice it was line up, roll up both sleeves, and walk the gauntlet.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
5.1.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Kavika @5.1.1    5 months ago

The one I remember the most was the one for typhoid.  Years later I got typhoid anyway with a strain the shot didn't protect me from.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Kavika @5.1.1    5 months ago

And walk out bleeding from both arms...

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Guide
5.1.4  1stwarrior  replied to  Trout Giggles @5.1.3    5 months ago

You betcha - jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
5.1.5  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Trout Giggles @5.1.3    5 months ago

Yep, them vaccination guns were fun things!

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
5.1.6  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Ed-NavDoc @5.1.5    5 months ago

Of all things , in 10 years active service , the only shot i had a reaction to that caused me to be hospitalized was of all things , the stinking flu shot .

 got an exemption for that , but havent had one since either .

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Guide
5.2  1stwarrior  replied to  Kavika @5    5 months ago

I was an Army Brat and everytime we transferred, my medical/health/shot records went with us to the next station and was given to the school I was enrolled in.  Numerous times we kiddies were lined up to go get our "currency shot/vaccinations".  No questions - just shots/immunizations.  Parents totally in favor of the procedures and this was in the 50'/60's.

Joined the Marines - you got'm when they said you gonna gett'm.  Same with when I was in the Coast Guard.  Just a notice from our "PA" the day before, line up, get poked and life went on.  No questions - just shots/immunizations.

Hell, in 'Nam, we had our 90 day GG shots (which side of the ass this time Marine?) - plus others - no questions - take'm or get busted/discharged.

The meds/shots we received were for our benefit and the benefit of our ability to hit the front line when needed - no sick bay excuses either.  I and the folks in my units all felt the same - you aren't properly medicated, you're letting your buddies down 'cause you aren't ready/able to perform your duties.

Today's "Snowflake" society will fight anything THEY don't want and futch the other guy/person/being.  Military discipline is for the benefit of all (believe it or not) and, as stated by others here, you sign the paper, you get the whole deal.  You don't wanna play ball??  Get off the ballfield - simple as that.

JMHO.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
5.2.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  1stwarrior @5.2    5 months ago

Tell me about it. As a Hospital Corpsman, I had to get my shots ahead of everybody else in the unit. Hard to feel sorry for Marines complaining about side effects when you already have them while you are vaccinating other folks.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @5.2.1    5 months ago

I can only imagine. I worked in the Med Group so we were always first in line

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.3  devangelical  replied to  Kavika @5    5 months ago

if they're trump supporters, who cares. they've already violated their military oaths to defend the constitution from all domestic enemies.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
5.3.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  devangelical @5.3    5 months ago

I consider any and every Trump supporter in the armed forces traitors.  THROW THEM OUT!

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.3.2  devangelical  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @5.3.1    5 months ago

they're traitors if they still support trumpski after 1/6/21...

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
5.3.3  Nowhere Man  replied to  devangelical @5.3.2    5 months ago

The Military does not support the president of the US, Unless this nation has become a dictatorship and did away with the constitution while I was asleep...

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.3.4  devangelical  replied to  Nowhere Man @5.3.3    5 months ago

trump isn't the president. he's a criminal and insurrectionist.

 
 
 
Freefaller
Professor Participates
5.4  Freefaller  replied to  Kavika @5    5 months ago

Not a vet yet as I'm still serving (10 months to go) but I'm fine with this.  My biggest issue with pers that won't vax is due to other countries regulations they cannot deploy to the various places we go which means those that do vax get more than their share of deployments, family separation, workload, etc

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.4.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Freefaller @5.4    5 months ago

You are a vet, Freefaller an active duty vet so your opinion is real-world, real-time.

Thanks for the input and it kinda matches with my relatives that expressed much the same sentiment re deployments among other things.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.4.2  devangelical  replied to  Freefaller @5.4    5 months ago

that's not fair to the vaxed service members. the military can't let these jerks slide on this crap. what's next, "I can't deploy because I don't want another hole in me due to gunpowder propelled lead?"

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
5.4.3  Duck Hawk  replied to  Freefaller @5.4    5 months ago
My biggest issue with pers that won't vax is due to other countries regulations they cannot deploy to the various places we go which means those that do vax get more than their share of deployments, family separation, workload, etc

it sounds like the anti-vaxxers need to be charged with "Missing Movement." hehe seems like we are back to summary court martial and OTH or BCD. jrSmiley_36_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
5.5  Greg Jones  replied to  Kavika @5    5 months ago

I gave four years of my young life to the USAF.  We had no choice when it came to the haircut or the shots

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
6  Nowhere Man    5 months ago

When you swear that oath, you've handed your ass over to the US government, you do what they tell you to as long as it doesn't violate your oath...

If you don't, get the fuck out...

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1  CB   replied to  Nowhere Man @6    5 months ago

It's true. It's true. A lawful order is a lawful order - even if or when it can kill ya. The only complain I can understand is the "short-timers." Other than that, if you are going to be quartered and working with others follow orders! The defense department must be the "brain" in the military 'body.'

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
6.1.1  Nowhere Man  replied to  CB @6.1    5 months ago

AS a service member your NOT charged with following all orders of a superior officer appointed over you...

You ARE charged with following all LAWFUL orders of those appointed over you... As service personnel you are always Responsible for the orders YOU choose to follow... And should always know what is a lawful order and what isn't... Read the USCMJ if you doubt this in any way, it's replete with many cases of claims of "I was only following orders" that have been rejected for cause...

A trooper is ALWAYS individually responsible for his actions while in uniform...

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.2  CB   replied to  Nowhere Man @6.1.1    5 months ago

What the heck are you telling me, Nowhere Man?! Who in the "heaven" is talking about any "unlawful-lawful" order here? It seems some here are so intent on being contrary, abrasive, and patronizing that any positive statement is bound for failure-since some here do not wish to agree with their fellow servicemembers over 'routine.'

"Choose to follow (orders)" that is an interesting term of phrase. I'll bite. During your service time (assuming it is so) did every order you follow suit your 'fancy' too? Apparently, you can't accept that I enhanced your comment with a comment of  my own. Wow! Wow! Wow! We have got a lot of work to do in this country to get back to respect for one another!

I offered nothing about any 'shady-dealing' order or even questionable order, if you choose to introduce 'shady-deals' into the discussion can you do so in a stand-alone comment?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7  Ronin2    5 months ago

No problem with the military discharging them if those are the rules they want to enforce; and that is the rabbit whole they want to go down.

It is not like they aren't already on a witch hunt trying to root out white supremacists. 

As far as having an effective fighting force with China and Russia both being serious threats..... That is on Mr Woke in the Oval Office. Knowing a few combat veterans that are facing discharge- they had better not try recalling them when the shit hits the fan. They will get a two finger salute as a response. (Of course Biden would get the same response from recently retired combat veterans that are fully vaccinated if they tried to recall them to active duty.  Afghanistan doesn't sit well with them.)

It is not like the military will be able to rapidly replace those they are forcing out.

.

Guess maintaining an effective fighting force is not high on Biden's agenda.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Ronin2 @7    5 months ago
No problem with the military discharging them if those are the rules they want to enforce; and that is the rabbit whole they want to go down.

Not a rabbit hole at all discipline is the key to military cohesive operations. Don't like the rules don't join the military.

It is not like they aren't already on a witch hunt trying to root out white supremacists. 

Not a witch hunt at all, if they are in the military run their racist ass out, perhaps they can join some militia.

As far as having an effective fighting force with China and Russia both being serious threats..... That is on Mr Woke in the Oval Office. Knowing a few combat veterans that are facing discharge- they had better not try recalling them when the shit hits the fan. They will get a two finger salute as a response. (Of course Biden would get the same response from recently retired combat veterans that are fully vaccinated if they tried to recall them to active duty.  Afghanistan doesn't sit well with them.)

Speaking to my active duty career NCOs relatives both serving with front line combat units are losing no one and are quite happy that the selfish assholes are being forced out. 

Guess maintaining an effective fighting force is not high on Biden's agenda.

Guess that you're making wild ass guesses.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7.1.1  Ronin2  replied to  Kavika @7.1    5 months ago
It is not like they aren't already on a witch hunt trying to root out white supremacists. 
Not a witch hunt at all, if they are in the military run their racist ass out, perhaps they can join some militia.

So, discharge someone when they have violated no military rules or regulations over who their family members might be; or who they may have associated with in the past. Welcome to the woke military. 

Well past time to get the leftist loons out power.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.1.2  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Ronin2 @7.1.1    5 months ago
So, discharge someone when they have violated no military rules or regulations over who their family members might be; or who they may have associated with in the past. Welcome to the woke military. 

Who said they didn't violate any military rules, you?

Welcome to the woke military.

I would much rather be in the woke military than in the denial coma some are in.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
7.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Kavika @7.1.2    5 months ago

Aren't they violating regulations when they refuse to take a vaccine? I would address this to Ronin but he wants me to ignore him

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.1.4  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Trout Giggles @7.1.3    5 months ago
Aren't they violating regulations when they refuse to take a vaccine?

Exactly.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.1.5  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Ronin2 @7.1.1    5 months ago

Do you actually have a position on whether or not the military should be vaccinated or not?

Your deflections are getting more bizarre each time you comment.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.1.6  devangelical  replied to  Kavika @7.1.5    5 months ago

too bad there isn't a vaccine for military brainwashing. it's evident that some have no resistance.

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
7.1.7  Duck Hawk  replied to  Kavika @7.1.2    5 months ago

It goes back to idea that you don't want someone guarding your back who you can't trust! A BLACK man with his six being guarded by a White Supremacist, on patrol would sound like a recipe for a friendly-fire incident.... 

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
7.1.8  Duck Hawk  replied to  Duck Hawk @7.1.7    5 months ago

I may have replied to the wrong person, sorry.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.1.9  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Duck Hawk @7.1.8    5 months ago

You did, no worries.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.1.10  CB   replied to  Ronin2 @7.1.1    5 months ago

You're making this unnecessarily political. Why?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
7.2  Dulay  replied to  Ronin2 @7    5 months ago
Of course Biden would get the same response from recently retired combat veterans that are fully vaccinated if they tried to recall them to active duty.  Afghanistan doesn't sit well with them.

Since retired military are actually still 'connected' to and paid by the DoD, if recalled, their response will be 'yes sir' or they can be court martialed and lose their pension. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7.2.1  Ronin2  replied to  Dulay @7.2    5 months ago

What about discharged military? Since that is what my comment was about. Think they are suddenly going to change their minds and get the vaccinations? 

As for the retired vets. Guess Biden had better hope it never comes to it. He will find out how little of a fighting force he really has left. 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
7.2.2  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Dulay @7.2    5 months ago

depends on the contract actually  and if all terms have been met .

 even after retirement , the retirees have to conform with good conduct , that is how they get you , as for the rest , it will depend on if all aspects of the contract has been completed , such as having completed the required amount of time in the reserves , be it active or inactive , or guard service .

Everyone knows about the 214 discharge ,  after completion of all service obligations , such as mentioned above , a 256 is issued , which basically is a total and complete discharge with the DOD having no authority or claim on the individual since their service obligation has been filled .

But as you mentioned , retirement and pension , can be affected because ot the agreement within the contract for "to remain of good character and conduct ones self in a manner that will not bring discredit on the branch of service ".

i was 214 discharged honorably in 1992 , due to reserve commitment i got my actual "freedom "  honorable discharge (256) in 1995 .

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.2.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @7.2    5 months ago
Since retired military are actually still 'connected' to and paid by the DoD, if recalled, their response will be 'yes sir' or they can be court martialed and lose their pension.

Yeah, my DD 214 says otherwise.  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
7.2.4  Dulay  replied to  Ronin2 @7.2.1    5 months ago
What about discharged military? Since that is what my comment was about. 

Wait WHAT? Let me look. Yep, here it is, from YOUR post Ronin:

Of course Biden would get the same response from recently retired combat veterans that are fully vaccinated if they tried to recall them to active duty.  Afghanistan doesn't sit well with them.

I directly address your claim with facts. 

As for the retired vets. Guess Biden had better hope it never comes to it. He will find out how little of a fighting force he really has left. 

Again, they then chose court martial and lose of their pension. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
7.2.5  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.2.3    5 months ago
Yeah, my DD 214 says otherwise.  

Really? What does it say Jeremy? 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.2.6  CB   replied to  Ronin2 @7.2.1    5 months ago

Some humility should be called for here. Overstating (and believing the hype) one's worth in the scheme of life and the destiny of this country is just well unacceptable. How will the country make it after some of y'all, us, are gone for good? Well, don't we all hope just fine!

We should all be pulling together as a whole nation instead of pulling (ourselves) apart into miserable fragments!  Surely, there is no cope for us if insidious politics wins over and leaks out the esprit de corps (breaks the bonds) military people place in each other.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.2.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @7.2.5    5 months ago

26 years 22 days total Active Duty Service.  Retired.  My total Active Duty Service ensures I cannot not be recalled.  My age ensures I will cannot be recalled.  And there are thousands of others like myself that cannot be recalled.  My pension and benefits will not be messed with if it tell them I'm not coming.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
7.2.8  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.2.7    5 months ago
My total Active Duty Service ensures I cannot not be recalled. 

Under what section does it say that on your DD 214 Jeremy? 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.2.9  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @7.2.5    5 months ago

It's becoming obvious that you  haven't served and don't have a DD214.

The information you are looking for is in Block 12 of the DD214.  From there you reference  Army Regulation 601-210 and MILPER Messages for the current RCP guidance.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
7.2.10  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Dulay @7.2    5 months ago

That is what needs to happen to Flynn, recall him and then courts martial him for treason.  Then collect back his retirement pay retroactive to his first documented case of treason.

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
7.2.11  evilgenius  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.2.10    5 months ago

Treason is the wrong charge - to my knowledge he has not given aide nor comfort to an enemy of war.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.2.12  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @7.2.4    5 months ago
Again, they then chose court martial and lose of their pension.

And exactly what article of the UCMJ would they be Court Martialed for?  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
7.2.13  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.2.9    5 months ago
It's becoming obvious that you  haven't served and don't have a DD214.

That's irrelevant to the question I asked Jeremy. 

The information you are looking for is in Block 12 of the DD214.

Yet that block doesn't state that your total Active Duty Service ensures you cannot not be recalled.

So your DD 214 DOESN'T 'say otherwise' because that information isn't included on it.

Instead of your DD 214, you cited the Army Regulation 601-210 and the RCP guidance for the qualifying information. 

So even though it's obvious that you did serve and have a DD 214, your statement was STILL bullshit. 

FAIL. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
7.2.14  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  evilgenius @7.2.11    5 months ago

Treason encompass more than that.

Treason is the crime of attacking a state authority to which one owes allegiance.This typically includes acts such as participating in a war against one's native country, attempting to overthrow its government, spying on its military, its diplomats, or its secret services for a hostile and foreign power, or attempting to kill or attempting to kill its head of state. A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor.

The first part in bold defines J6 to a tee.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
7.2.15  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.2.12    5 months ago

Article 92 Jeremy. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.2.16  Tessylo  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.2.10    5 months ago

Treason fits for everyone involved in Jan. 6, 21

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.2.17  Tessylo  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.2.14    5 months ago

It fits those scum to a tee.  

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
7.2.18  evilgenius  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.2.14    5 months ago

Definitions matter.

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645,62 Stat. 807;Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J),Sept. 13, 1994,108 Stat. 2148.)
To my knowledge no one involved has declared war against the US or gave aid/comfort to any US war enemies. The term does not fit.

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645,62 Stat. 808;Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L),Sept. 13, 1994,108 Stat. 2147.)
Rebels or insurrectionists fits better, which is why everyone else is using it.
 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.2.19  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @7.2.16    5 months ago

You are spot on Paula.  Those traitors need to have the book thrown at them.  Those who planned it all.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.2.20  Tessylo  replied to  evilgenius @7.2.18    5 months ago

Scum fits way better.

I don't care about your definitions.  They're traitors.  Especially those who planned it.  

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
7.2.21  evilgenius  replied to  Tessylo @7.2.20    5 months ago
I don't care about your definitions.

That doesn't make them less true.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.2.22  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @7.2.13    5 months ago
It's becoming obvious that you  haven't served and don't have a DD214. That's irrelevant to the question I asked Jeremy. 

But it lets me know what I'm dealing with.

So your DD 214 DOESN'T 'say otherwise' because that information isn't included on it. Instead of your DD 214, you cited the Army Regulation 601-210 and the RCP guidance for the qualifying information. 

"Instead"? Try reading my statement more closely.  "The information you are looking for is in Block 12 of the DD214.  From there you reference  Army Regulation 601-210 and MILPER Messages for the current RCP guidance."  Did you miss the first sentence?  If so I made if bold for you.  Block 12 works out my total Time In Service.  Referring to AR 601-210 and MILPER Messages will tell you if somebody with that amount of Time In Service can be recalled.  

So even though it's obvious that you did serve and have a DD 214, your statement was STILL bullshit.

The only reason my statement seems like BS to you is because of your lack of knowledge and / or inability / unwillingness to do the necessary research.  I gave you everything you need to work it all out yourself.  The same way many of us retirees work it out.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.2.23  Tessylo  replied to  evilgenius @7.2.21    5 months ago

Like I said - WHATEVER!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.2.24  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @7.2.15    5 months ago

yeah, no.  Anybody with a DD214 is released from military service.  We do not have to abide by any military regulations.  The only exception to that would be if you worked on a military installation.  And even then the UCMJ is not one that applies.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
7.2.25  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.2.22    5 months ago
But it lets me know what I'm dealing with.

You should have known that the second that you posted in Sinners and Buttheads Jeremy. 

Referring to AR 601-210 and MILPER Messages will tell you if somebody with that amount of Time In Service can be recalled. 

Thanks for confirming what said.

The only reason my statement seems like BS to you is because of your lack of knowledge and / or inability / unwillingness to do the necessary research. 

No Jeremy, it IS BS because you said that 'Block 12 of the DD214' said it Jeremy. 

I gave you everything you need to work it all out yourself.  The same way many of us retirees work it out.

Then you threw in a crap load of equivocation to cover your ass. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
7.2.26  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.2.24    5 months ago

Well gee Jeremy, the discussion was about those that recently retired and WERE eligible for recall. Try to keep up. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.2.27  CB   replied to  Tessylo @7.2.20    5 months ago

Now, now, Tessylo! Care about definitions. Because what is good in one argument for and against, is good in another of equal stature. Play fair! (Smile.)

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
7.2.28  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Dulay @7.2.8    5 months ago

It doesn't.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
7.2.29  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Ronin2 @7.2.1    5 months ago

As someone who served active duty in the Navy for 20 years and 10 years inactive Fleet Reserve, I wish Biden and his minions lots of luck trying to recall me! 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
7.2.30  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.2.24    5 months ago

Actually, that is not necessarily true. Most military enlistments come with a inactive reserve clause at the end of the term of enlistment that allows service members to be recalled to active duty, DD 214 or not. That clause has only been enforced once since the Korean War and that was for Desert Storm. I saw a lot of pissed off sailors that got letters from the DOD telling them that they were being recalled to active duty.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.2.31  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Ed-NavDoc @7.2.30    5 months ago

I believe that in 2020 Trump issued a IRR order.

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
7.2.32  Nowhere Man  replied to  Kavika @7.2.31    5 months ago
I believe that in 2020 Trump issued a IRR order.

You mean this one....

You may have heard that President Trump signed an executive order Friday, March 27 allowing the military to  recall members of the selected reserve  and some former service members to active duty in support of the government's response to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak.
 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
7.2.33  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Nowhere Man @7.2.32    5 months ago

Issued, but never implemented I believe.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.3  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @7    5 months ago
It is not like they aren't already on a witch hunt trying to root out white supremacists. 

... as they should be...

Knowing a few combat veterans that are facing discharge- they had better not try recalling them when the shit hits the fan. They will get a two finger salute as a response.

we already know what kind of americans anti-vaxers are...

Of course Biden would get the same response from recently retired combat veterans that are fully vaccinated if they tried to recall them to active duty.  Afghanistan doesn't sit well with them.

placing all the blame of afghanistan on biden's shoulders is just more proof that these examples of military personnel, active or retired, are much too ignorant and insubordinate to be a part of the service.

It is not like the military will be able to rapidly replace those they are forcing out.

america and the military is better off without them...

Guess maintaining an effective fighting force is not high on Biden's agenda.

who needs service people that won't carry out an order due to ignorance and/or cowardice.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
7.3.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  devangelical @7.3    5 months ago

I have been a squad leader many times.  I would rather be short a few personnel than to have those who would put another soldier's health at risk.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
7.3.2  Krishna  replied to  devangelical @7.3    5 months ago
we already know what kind of americans anti-vaxers are...

Indeed.

256

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.3.3  devangelical  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.3.1    5 months ago
I would rather be short a few personnel than to have those who would put another soldier's health at risk.

damn straight and that's what we have now is a bunch of morons that are not only willing to gamble with their lives, they're willing to gamble with everyone else's. anybody want to go to war with that type of selfish mentality? no. it sure as hell isn't the level of patriotism you'd expect in the service of our country.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.3.4  CB   replied to  devangelical @7.3.3    5 months ago

The defense department simply does not have the time or luxury to sort people by vaccination or non-vaccination assignments at-large.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
7.3.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.3.1    5 months ago

I'll go back if they want me

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
7.3.6  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Trout Giggles @7.3.5    5 months ago

Due to past legal problems, there is no way I would be recalled, but I would go back if ordered to.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
7.3.7  Trout Giggles  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.3.6    5 months ago

I doubt very much if they would ever recall me mostly because of my age and I gave them every bit of time I signed up for. But if they needed me I would go back

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
7.4  sandy-2021492  replied to  Ronin2 @7    5 months ago

Off on a tangent, huh?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.4.1  CB   replied to  sandy-2021492 @7.4    5 months ago

I can't believe Ronin2 wrote that on a subject as serious as this. Where are some people's minds at this point and time? Vaccinations are routine in today's world. And every sophisticated enlisted soldier has to know that his or her service could result in being put in some 'hairy' or grave situations with another individual or team.

What is there to argue about over DOD working hard to save its members' lives? DOD has nothing to gain by 'losing' servicemembers through attrition and forced outs! Nothing! Wide-spread discharges go against force readiness-negatively.  Still, service-members deciding service policy: No-NO!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
7.4.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  CB @7.4.1    5 months ago
Where are some people's minds at this point and time?

Well, if one has never served one's mind is probably thinking only of oneself. One does not have that luxury in the military. The unit depends on all working together and if that means everybody gets a shot then that's what that means

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.4.3  CB   replied to  Trout Giggles @7.4.2    5 months ago

Emphatically.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
7.4.4  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  CB @7.4.1    5 months ago

I totally believe it.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ronin2 @7    5 months ago
Guess maintaining an effective fighting force is not high on Biden's agenda.

An effective fighting force hasn't been high on Democrats agenda for decades. This failure administration no different. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.5.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.5    5 months ago

Following Ronin down the rabbit hole. The article and questions are about the vaccine do you have a view on that or not?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.5.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Kavika @7.5.1    5 months ago

So we aren't permitted to comment on something somebody said?  Or does that only permitted to occur when it fits somebody a particular narrative?

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.5.3  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.5.2    5 months ago

So you don't have a view but prefer to whine.

You could post your own article and complain to your heart's content.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.5.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Kavika @7.5.3    5 months ago

Why don't you answer my questions instead of blathering on.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.5.5  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.5.4    5 months ago
Why don't you answer my questions instead of blathering on.

You seem to have a lock on babbling on, is making an on-topic comment above your pay grade?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
7.5.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Kavika @7.5.5    5 months ago

So it's just as I thought.  My comment doesn't fit a particular narrative so you are going to cry about it. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.5.7  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @7.5.6    5 months ago

Happy to hear that you've had a thought.  Certainly no crying on my part I leave that to you and you're doing a fine job of it. 

BTW, my article my rules, don't like them you should show some initiative and post your own article or you can keep whining, your choice.

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
8  Duck Hawk    5 months ago

I think that everyone who didn't get the vaccine as ordered should be out with an OTH. AN example needs to made! When you enlisted you gave up certain rights to autonomy, etc. YOU belong to the US Gov't. As such these people have now disobeyed a lawful order from the CinC to get vaccinated. Summary Court Martial time and busted out as a E-1. OTH is upgradeable to general discharge. they should not be getting a honorable discharge for refusing to obey orders.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
9  Thrawn 31    5 months ago

Good.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
10  Thrawn 31    5 months ago

Good.

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
11  evilgenius    5 months ago

Read another article yesterday saying that religious exemptions are rarer than hens teeth for the military and it really surprised those that are looking for them. One Chaplin was saying the service personnel were often surprised that he wasn't the one making the decision. He could only add a memo to the case file.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
11.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  evilgenius @11    5 months ago

I think that is something recruiters look into when trying to get you to sign on the dotted line. I could be wrong

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
12  Split Personality    5 months ago

800

 
 

Who is online

shona1


56 visitors