http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,136405,00.html

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if you are an officer in the military you literally sign your life away. The government owns you. They can call you back into service any time they want. I'm not sure if I should pity him for not having the patience to read through the entire contract he signed, or, if he knew about that clause, if I should be pissed that he is trying to get out of the contract he signed by joining the civil lawsuit bandwagon of those that want all the privledges of adulthood but none of the responsibility of adulthood.

Pfft, what a stupidhead. hehe:p

your sig kind of has a significance with this thread

However yours isn't...

I kinda feel sorry for the guy, if he properly resigned he should be out the armed forces, the army hs no control over him

you didn't read the article or my post, did you?

He doesn't have to agree with you if he reads the article or your post....

I think he should be allowed to stay home. He fulfilled his end of the resignation process and he shouldn't be shipped off for another year and a half because the Army is too slow at processing paperwork. That's rediculous.

His opinion isn't the problem. It's when people make kneejerk posts that directly contradict what has been said, but then don't explain why the previous person is wrong that is the problem.

Well, it's all fine and nice to be in the Army until a war comes. After that, it sucks. Getting killed seriously hampers the ability to just get on with your life...

And the military makes sure you know the consequences of war before you sign up. I could go off on a tangent from there, but I don't want to derail my own thread.

He did give a reason, the same one I did. If he resigned, he should be out. That simple.

If he just signed the resignation line and made sure he is completely resigned from the army, he wouldn't have faced so much trouble. The man is incompetent at filling out important paperwork. And this sort of thing happens. Tough.

I agree that if he filed proper resignation and did everything right, than he should be allowed to continue on with his life.

But it's not that simple. Why has no one addressed my "government owns officers" statements? No one has even suggested a policy change in that regard. Are people just ignoring parts of other people's posts that they don't want to bother with? Why is that a common trend at Massassi? I've seen that in every political and religious thread.

Please, could someone stop looking at just the surface of the issue and come a few inches deeper down here with me?

And yes I know I sound like an arrogant douche right now, but I didn't post this story just so everyone can ignore the complexity of the issue. This isn't necessarily a situation of black and white. I'm trying to spark a dialogue here.

It doesn't say anything about HIM not filling papwerwork out correctly, that was another guy.

What is it that you want people to talk about? So the Army owns officers, big deal. That's why they aren't civilians anymore, they are literally government property. I must be missing your point. Pardon all of us for not following your line of thought like robots, we do have minds of our own and we may not be interested in the same parts of the story that you are.

irc.rying.net #cry

Except officers are never fully resigned. They can always be called back to active service. Thay may be out of the Army for a time, but the Army has the right to call them back. You can not agree with that all you want, but his lawsuit has no basis under current regulations

More than just saying "He shouldn't/should have to do it." Am I the only one that sees a problem with someone simple stating their stance and then not defending it? It's obvious that people think his filing resignation papers trumps the contract the government has over him. Why? Explain this to me. You can't just say your opinion and than not justify it. A baseless opinion is worthless. I'm not a close minded person that just wants to shoot down all arguments that come my way and watch my ego about my opinion grow. I want people to try and falsify and argue my and other peoples statements. I don't care about being right or not. I just want to understand.



back on topic
So then what's the issue? Officers are government property for life. This supercedes the officers resignation papers.

The reason I haven't "backed up" my stance is because it's so damn simple. He resigns, so he's no longer in the army. So the Army can't call him back, so he has no reason to go. That's about the only explanation I can come up with for something that simple.

If Avenger is correct about officers never being able to REALLY retire, then he doesn't have a case. I don't know about that part, I've never heard that before (which doesn't mean much). If that is the case, maybe you would've gotten the responses you wanted if you had also posted a link to that bit of information for those of us who may not be familiar with that policy. After all, it is fairly important to the story.

I'm wondering if he think he's found a way around such a policy, if it exists. I would think that he, being an officer, would know about that.

there is someing like a 5 year period after you are 'retired' or what ever that thay can call you back if thay feel like thay need you for what ever reason.

Your just screwing with me now, aren't you Crimson? :p

Arg, you make such serious and eloquent (if odd-sounding) posts and get my guard down. Then you go and post something like that and make me laugh my left eyeball out my nose.

Also, Kieran, your thread topic made me giggle. Teehee.

When I read the title, I thought that this was going to be a relationship thread. :p

That's probably where all the confusion is coming from. People think I'm talking about a gay relationship. O_o

No, I'm far too tired for that