In a “you’ve got to be kidding me” blast of exasperation, I read this story from KDKA about the military demanding portions of wounded soldiers signing bonuses, because they did not complete their original commitment.
I’m sorry, but losing a leg or being so forever scared from a roadside bomb that you have to be discharged must trump any commitment made on the front end. This is un-American, and an affront to our war heroes. Somebody in Congress do something, now.
November 21st, 2007 at 8:45 am
I wonder if this may be a result of the game of chicken Harry Reid and his Move On Democrats are playing with current defense budget allocations. This is really a sad situation and I find it hard to believe anyone, Democrat or Republican, would condone it. Reid should be ashamed of himself.
November 21st, 2007 at 4:00 pm
This practice has gone on long before the Democrats started pushing for budget cuts and time limits. Jmaes ought to get his facts straight.
November 23rd, 2007 at 9:54 pm
I looks like this was a bureaucratic bungle, not a matter of policy. Those who drop out of the military early (due to being somehow unsuited for military life) were intended to lose their signing bonuses. But the system couldn’t tell the difference between those who dropped out due to being unfit for the military, and those who were discharged due to injuries.