Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Depends on the job, but most are on 6 months in the Air Force. After my 6 month deployment, they were planning on sending me to Korea for a year if I re-enlisted. Hell with that!
I definitely think that the deployment times should be uniform. Maybe there is some scientific study showing why different services need different deployment times, but until i see it i'll continue to think that it's not only stupid, but a tremendous waste of money.
I agree that deployments are sort of the monkey wrench in this argument.
I see it this way: the way the modern military does deployments encourages multiple deployments and a ridiculous ops tempo. They send you for a year (6 months for Marines and i think 90 days for Air Force...stupid really...it should be uniform), then you get a year or two of downtime before redeploying again.
I would politely advise you to take care before stating military facts, as many of the things that you've said in regards to military benefits and responsibilities has been flat out wrong. A LOT of things have changed since you were in. The current standard for Air Force deployments is between 8 and 12 months. Being deployed for less than six months is now the rare exception, rather than the rule.
Additionally, many Air Force enlisted personnel are frequently deployed to fill Army billets. Imagine being a full time computer programmer getting stuffed in a Humvee for convoy duty dodging IEDs with virtually no training compared to your Army counterparts. A few weeks of CST (combat skills training) and 80 rounds through an M-16.... we may as well just throw our Airmen to the wolves.
...or better yet, how about being the same computer programmer getting forward deployed to a PRT (provincial reconstruction team) in Afghanistan, dodging mortars and sniper fire while you try to keep the IT equipment up and running so the soldiers can communicate.
As far as the rest of what you said, I don't have much to say about because I don't really disagree. I'm simply trying to paint a picture of the Air Force for you, so you know what we're dealing with right now.
The Air Force hasn't done 90-day deployments since the 1990's. Most of our tours are 6 months with a good portion of 1 year tours. Ops tempo depends on specialty, with some are 1:1 (6 months home, 6 months deployed); most are 1:2 and 1:3. In addition to Air Force deployments, the USAF also fills rotations that the Army or Marine Corps couldn't fill.
In all this, the Air Force has held Reductions-In-Force for the last 5 years since our budget can't cover our operating costs, replacing stuff that's broken, buying new stuff, and paying people to use it.
I would politely advise you to take care before stating military facts, as many of the things that you've said in regards to military benefits and responsibilities has been flat out wrong. A LOT of things have changed since you were in. The current standard for Air Force deployments is between 8 and 12 months now. Being deployed for less than eight months is now the rare exception, rather than the rule.
Additionally, many Air Force enlisted personnel are frequently deployed to fill Army billets. Imagine being a full time computer programmer getting stuffed in a Humvee for convoy duty dodging IEDs with virtually no training compared to your Army counterparts. A few weeks of CST (combat skills training) and 80 rounds through an M-16.... we may as well just throw our Airmen to the wolves.
...or better yet, how about being the same computer programmer getting forward deployed to a PRT (provincial reconstruction team) in Afghanistan, dodging mortars and sniper fire while you try to keep the IT equipment up and running so the soldiers can communicate.
As far as the rest of what you said, I don't have much to say about because I don't really disagree. I'm simply trying to paint a picture of the Air Force for you, so you know what we're dealing with right now.
You can politely advise whatever the hell you want. Advice noted, but not taken. Moving on....
Funny...you're trying to clown me, but an Air Force member just came on and said most deploy for 6 months in the post before mine. Maybe it's you that doesn't know certain military facts. And it is a fact that some deploy for 90 days. You can't deny that.
And besides mistaking DEERS for Tricare Dental or Delta Dental, which is a semantical argument really, what facts did i get wrong? Show me.
Outside of that, my feelings about deployments remain the same despite what you've stated. With few exceptions, deployments should be uniform. If a soldier can stay for a year, there is no good reason why a Marine, Airman, or Squid can't do a year.
Mykl, don't bother. There are few posters on here who are intent of thinking of the military as a nice, cushy ride where you just surf the internet all day... have a few smokes and jokes, and punch out early to go home and plan on building that dream mansion with all that money that's coming to you in retirement.
My guess is that they just haven't been around the military much in the past 10 years, or they're working some cushy government job around a bunch of military types who might as well be civilians. (I thought Rumsfeld civilianized all of the "cush" jobs back in 2004?)
Look, you don't have to believe me, but the reality is that the past decade, most of the time I've been in, has been about training for war, fighting the war, resetting after you get back from the war. We're being told that in 2014, we're going to go to 36 months back for every 12 months deployed. For most of my time in, it's been 12 on, 12 off. During that "off" time, you go to the field and train for the "on" time.
If you want to change the retirement system, please do so in a way that honors the service for those of us who have been living the dream for the past ten years.
Mykl, don't bother. There are few posters on here who are intent of thinking of the military as a nice, cushy ride where you just surf the internet all day... have a few smokes and jokes, and punch out early to go home and plan on building that dream mansion with all that money that's coming to you in retirement.
My guess is that they just haven't been around the military much in the past 10 years, or they're working some cushy government job around a bunch of military types who might as well be civilians. (I thought Romney civilianized all of the "cush" jobs back in 2004?)
Look, you don't have to believe me, but the reality is that the past decade, most of the time I've been in, has been about training for war, fighting the war, resetting after you get back from the war. We're being told that in 2014, we're going to go to 36 months back for every 12 months deployed. For most of my time in, it's been 12 on, 12 off. During that "off" time, you go to the field and train for the "on" time.
If you want to change the retirement system, please do so in a way that honors the service for those of us who have been living the dream for the past ten years.
.....yet you keep reenlisting. ETS if it's such a hellish career. They're about to ramp up the QMP boards (if they haven't already) and a lot of folks are worried. That tells me that it's a pretty damn good job if they actually have to FORCE people off of active duty despite all of these deployments.
I'm simply saying that the retirement system ought to reflect present times. I'm not saying that servicemen should contribute more to their pensions, nor am i saying that they don't deserve a pension. I'm saying that 50% of the high 3 at 20 years is overly generous, and that 20 years isn't as long or as difficult as it once was since the military is far more family oriented, and pays much better than it once did. No, it's not "cushy," but a person of similar rank in 1965 endured far worse.
.....yet you keep reenlisting. ETS if it's such a hellish career. They're about the ramp up the QMP boards (if they haven't already) and a lot of folks are worried. That tells me that it's a pretty damn good job if they actually have to FORCE people off of active duty despite all of these deployments.
I'm simply saying that the retirement system ought to reflect present times. I'm not saying that servicemen should contribute more to their pensions, nor am i saying that they don't deserve a pension. I'm saying that 50% of the high 3 at 20 years is overly generous, and that 20 years isn't as long or as difficult as it once was since the military is far more family oriented, and pays much better than it once did. No, it's not "cushy," but a person of similar rank in 1965 endured far worse.
Desert, I don't want to keep going around and around with you on this. You keep saying, why did you reenlist? I reenlisted for one set of expectations. If they are going to change the expectations, then I want to "un" reenlist.
If the DOD feels it needs to make changes to the retirement system. Fine. They can do so. (Good luck finding people, but if you're going for a younger .. more one-term kind of force .. then cool... this system is going to work great for you.)
I either want to be grandfathered in or given the option to get out. I'd like the DoD to make up its mind in a few months on this matter, by the way, so I won't move out of this state and my wife won't lose the pension she's been working toward for the past five years.
As for youre 1965 comment... who knows. I can tell you that what I've done for the past ten years has not been "shamming." That's all I know. For most of my time, 14-hour days have been the norm. I'd like a retirement that reflects the "times" ... this new retirement system sounds like a winner for the post 2014 peace time Army.
Military retirement is like winning the lottery... assuming you don't get sent off to your death. In general, it's the young ones who are killed though... so if you make it through the first 10 years or so there's almost no reason to leave. The best thing to do is to go in as an officer; after 20 years you'll be at least a Major, or maybe even a Lt Colonel or higher (AF, Army, or Marine Corps rank). The retirement pay is considerably higher.
It's a risky proposition that few 18 or 22 year olds realize, as the risk of being killed or maimed at the whims of politicians are considerable. The government pays the military fairly well, but they could care less if they send soldiers, sailors, or marines to their deaths.
Are there any statistics on what percentage of troops get killed because of their job?
Anyway, since people join the military voluntarily in the US, I don't quite understand that privilege...
It does seem incongruous for people who "Defend Freedom" to demand that compulsory taxation pay their pensions.
I guess some people are more "free" than others.
So who should pay soldiers' salaries? Is defense now something government should get out of too? Or should we should work for "free" -- since we love freedom and all.
I can tell this is going to get ugly. I naively believed that putting my trust in the government and the American people wasn't misplaced. I bet my family's future and security on this. How foolish. I see now once this gets going we're going to get a beat down from both ends -- the Left because we're patriots, and the Right because we're labor.
I should warn you, jet, when you see soldiers at the airport, don't spit on them. You're likely to get hurt. The past decade has left us in kind of a bad mood, and not at all afraid of physical confrontation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
