Home
Nekochan wrote:
.
However, my issue is that service members benefits and military readiness should not be cut. ....
Well, "readiness" ... of course not. But IMO we need a right-sized military that meets our needs .... and those needs should not include foreign interventionism/adventurism to every trouble spot in the world that has some dubious or very tangential relationship to our actual national security. Fact is, we are just not very likely to have to worry about a land invasion from Mexico, Canada, or anybody else, really.
As to military pay and benefits .... too many people approach this topic with a "rah-rah", "support the troops", "nothing but the best for our boys & girls in uniform", "'Merca !" etc knee-jerk emotional flag-waving virtue-signaling response. IMO we should put all that aside and military pay and benefits should be structured as such to attract and retain the right kind of people needed. No more, no less. There's lots more hazardous civilian occupations than most military occupations .... and civilian ER Nurses suffer PTSD too, ya know.
(and yes, btw, before anybody goes off on some tirade about how unpatriotic or whatever I am about that .... so happens I am a military veteran - 4 years active 4 years reserve - EOD)[/i]