Page 1 of 1

White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Tue May 19, 2020 6:02 pm
by Aaron747
Not a good luck at all for this ‘nobody has ever loved the military more than me’ POTUS:

Rep. Max Rose (D-N.Y.) slammed the White House’s decision to end the National Guard’s deployments the day before they can claim benefits in a Tuesday statement.

Rose criticized President Trump’s administration for deciding to stop deployments on June 24, the day before thousands of National Guard members would qualify for early retirement and education benefits under the Post-9/11 GI bill...

...“In peace time we should never balance our budget on the backs of our soldiers," he added, "so why anyone would think this is okay to do in the middle of a wartime effort is beyond human comprehension."


https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4984 ... e-they-can

Let’s see if they come to their senses and reverse this.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Tue May 19, 2020 8:50 pm
by GalaxyFlyer
You clearly have no experience with DoD policy. They’ve done this and worse for decades. For many years, going back, at least to Desert Storm, reserve component members approaching sanctuary zone for retirement were denied AD orders which would result in a full AD retirement. I had 8 or 9 enlisted and officers who fell under this order. Believe me, an AD retirement at 45 is worth a lot more than GI benefits.

Just a little personal history, I got 89 day orders, post-UPT in 1977 for exactly this reason. It’s policy, not some mysterious Trump invention.

GF

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Tue May 19, 2020 9:42 pm
by einsteinboricua
Definitely a pro-military president. So much that he shafts them just as they're on the cusp of claiming benefits.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Tue May 19, 2020 10:02 pm
by GalaxyFlyer
Believe what you will, but I’m telling you this is very long-standing DOD policy. Is it right or wrong, that’s another discussion, but it’s not some WH invention. And, the benefits were designed for combat veterans.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 1:22 am
by Aaron747
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Believe what you will, but I’m telling you this is very long-standing DOD policy. Is it right or wrong, that’s another discussion, but it’s not some WH invention. And, the benefits were designed for combat veterans.


Their families sacrifice a lot - combat or non. It’s a cheap move to pull the rug out, regardless of who’s in charge. My point stands, the policy can change if 45’s claimed love for the service is truly historic and not BS posturing.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 1:28 am
by flyguy89
Aaron747 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Believe what you will, but I’m telling you this is very long-standing DOD policy. Is it right or wrong, that’s another discussion, but it’s not some WH invention. And, the benefits were designed for combat veterans.


Their families sacrifice a lot - combat or non. It’s a cheap move to pull the rug out, regardless of who’s in charge. My point stands, the policy can change if 45’s claimed love for the service is truly historic and not BS posturing.

OK but all POTUSs claim to love the military yet pull the rug out from under them in this regard. What makes Trump so different in this regard?

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 1:36 am
by Aaron747
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Believe what you will, but I’m telling you this is very long-standing DOD policy. Is it right or wrong, that’s another discussion, but it’s not some WH invention. And, the benefits were designed for combat veterans.


Their families sacrifice a lot - combat or non. It’s a cheap move to pull the rug out, regardless of who’s in charge. My point stands, the policy can change if 45’s claimed love for the service is truly historic and not BS posturing.

OK but all POTUSs claim to love the military yet pull the rug out from under them in this regard. What makes Trump so different in this regard?


It’s in the OP - he claims to love them more than anyone in history. But yea, his use of them as props is no different from other presidents. For me his most crass moment was describing families’ reactions to coffins in a speech at Dover. That’s supposed to be private - and he was rightfully rebuked by many retired officers for it.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 1:52 am
by flyguy89
Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

Their families sacrifice a lot - combat or non. It’s a cheap move to pull the rug out, regardless of who’s in charge. My point stands, the policy can change if 45’s claimed love for the service is truly historic and not BS posturing.

OK but all POTUSs claim to love the military yet pull the rug out from under them in this regard. What makes Trump so different in this regard?


It’s in the OP - he claims to love them more than anyone in history. But yea, his use of them as props is no different from other presidents. For me his most crass moment was describing families’ reactions to coffins in a speech at Dover. That’s supposed to be private - and he was rightfully rebuked by many retired officers for it.

But you can understand the cynicism inherent in the critique, no? That one didn't care or even notice when it was happening for decades prior, but now because Trump it's a scandal...not any sort of sincere care for the servicemen impacted.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 1:59 am
by alfa164
Aaron747 wrote:
It’s in the OP - he claims to love them more than anyone in history. But yea, his use of them as props is no different from other presidents. For me his most crass moment was describing families’ reactions to coffins in a speech at Dover. That’s supposed to be private - and he was rightfully rebuked by many retired officers for it.



Part of the legitimate criticism comes from his promise (yeah, we all believe his promises, don't we? :roll: ) to take care of the military:

"In 2017, Donald Trump signed something called the “Forever GI Bill” at his company’s golf course in Bedminster, New Jersey. The law expanded the educational benefits that had been made available under the “Post-9/11 GI Bill,” which was passed in 2008, and which supplemented various benefits that can be traced back to the original 1944 GI Bill. The White House would later tout the “Forever GI Bill” as an example of how Trump was “working tirelessly to provide the benefits and services that our veterans deserve.”


https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/national-guard-deployments-to-fight-coronavirus-will-end-day-before-benefits-kick-in.html?via=taps_top

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 2:00 am
by Newark727
flyguy89 wrote:
But you can understand the cynicism inherent in the critique, no? That one didn't care or even notice when it was happening for decades prior, but now because Trump it's a scandal...not any sort of sincere care for the servicemen impacted.


Wasn't not doing the things other politicians had done for decades prior, not being the politician of decades prior, central to Trump's entire case for being elected? If that's the case it's only fair that he attracts scrutiny when he makes identical mistakes.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 2:01 am
by Aaron747
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
OK but all POTUSs claim to love the military yet pull the rug out from under them in this regard. What makes Trump so different in this regard?


It’s in the OP - he claims to love them more than anyone in history. But yea, his use of them as props is no different from other presidents. For me his most crass moment was describing families’ reactions to coffins in a speech at Dover. That’s supposed to be private - and he was rightfully rebuked by many retired officers for it.

But you can understand the cynicism inherent in the critique, no? That one didn't care or even notice when it was happening for decades prior, but now because Trump it's a scandal...not any sort of sincere care for the servicemen impacted.


I follow Rep. Rose for his interest in veterans’ issues and picked this up. Can you also not see the inherent critique in a POTUS who literally wraps himself in the flag, skirted service himself, while keeping harmful policy in place? I don’t see what’s defensible here once ‘all POTUS have used troops as a prop’ is on the table.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 3:35 am
by flyguy89
Newark727 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
But you can understand the cynicism inherent in the critique, no? That one didn't care or even notice when it was happening for decades prior, but now because Trump it's a scandal...not any sort of sincere care for the servicemen impacted.


Wasn't not doing the things other politicians had done for decades prior, not being the politician of decades prior, central to Trump's entire case for being elected? If that's the case it's only fair that he attracts scrutiny when he makes identical mistakes.

There's plenty enough other things that he has done to attract legitimate scrutiny. Suddenly harping on a decades-old DOD policy that Trump didn't have an active hand in and was most likely just ignorant of is just hen-pecking and more background noise at this point.

Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

It’s in the OP - he claims to love them more than anyone in history. But yea, his use of them as props is no different from other presidents. For me his most crass moment was describing families’ reactions to coffins in a speech at Dover. That’s supposed to be private - and he was rightfully rebuked by many retired officers for it.

But you can understand the cynicism inherent in the critique, no? That one didn't care or even notice when it was happening for decades prior, but now because Trump it's a scandal...not any sort of sincere care for the servicemen impacted.


I follow Rep. Rose for his interest in veterans’ issues and picked this up. Can you also not see the inherent critique in a POTUS who literally wraps himself in the flag, skirted service himself, while keeping harmful policy in place?

Sure, but again, why are we only outraged about it now?

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 3:38 am
by Aaron747
flyguy89 wrote:
Newark727 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
But you can understand the cynicism inherent in the critique, no? That one didn't care or even notice when it was happening for decades prior, but now because Trump it's a scandal...not any sort of sincere care for the servicemen impacted.


Wasn't not doing the things other politicians had done for decades prior, not being the politician of decades prior, central to Trump's entire case for being elected? If that's the case it's only fair that he attracts scrutiny when he makes identical mistakes.

There's plenty enough other things that he has done to attract legitimate scrutiny. Suddenly harping on a decades-old DOD policy that Trump didn't have an active hand in and was most likely just ignorant of is just hen-pecking and more background noise at this point.

Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
But you can understand the cynicism inherent in the critique, no? That one didn't care or even notice when it was happening for decades prior, but now because Trump it's a scandal...not any sort of sincere care for the servicemen impacted.


I follow Rep. Rose for his interest in veterans’ issues and picked this up. Can you also not see the inherent critique in a POTUS who literally wraps himself in the flag, skirted service himself, while keeping harmful policy in place?

Sure, but again, why are we only outraged about it now?


Dunno about you, but I don’t use language like ‘not a good look’ when outraged. Not sure why you’re ascribing emotions that aren’t actually here.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 4:39 am
by Pellegrine
I just heard about this. Seems very on-brand for Trump.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 4:45 am
by tommy1808
Aaron747 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Believe what you will, but I’m telling you this is very long-standing DOD policy. Is it right or wrong, that’s another discussion, but it’s not some WH invention. And, the benefits were designed for combat veterans.


Their families sacrifice a lot - combat or non. It’s a cheap move to pull the rug out, regardless of who’s in charge. My point stands, the policy can change if 45’s claimed love for the service is truly historic and not BS posturing.


Isn't he the guy that stole the money to support construction programs in Mexico by putting a material depot on the border, his vanity wall, by carving money out of the budget meant to improve living quarters and schools on military bases?

Best regards
Thomas

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 4:53 am
by seb146
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
You clearly have no experience with DoD policy. They’ve done this and worse for decades. For many years, going back, at least to Desert Storm, reserve component members approaching sanctuary zone for retirement were denied AD orders which would result in a full AD retirement. I had 8 or 9 enlisted and officers who fell under this order. Believe me, an AD retirement at 45 is worth a lot more than GI benefits.

Just a little personal history, I got 89 day orders, post-UPT in 1977 for exactly this reason. It’s policy, not some mysterious Trump invention.

GF


If this "nobody loves the troops more than me" guy really loves the troops he would have vetoed this. But he didn't.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 5:53 am
by tommy1808
seb146 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
You clearly have no experience with DoD policy. They’ve done this and worse for decades. For many years, going back, at least to Desert Storm, reserve component members approaching sanctuary zone for retirement were denied AD orders which would result in a full AD retirement. I had 8 or 9 enlisted and officers who fell under this order. Believe me, an AD retirement at 45 is worth a lot more than GI benefits.

Just a little personal history, I got 89 day orders, post-UPT in 1977 for exactly this reason. It’s policy, not some mysterious Trump invention.

GF


If this "nobody loves the troops more than me" guy really loves the troops he would have vetoed this. But he didn't.


...and i would really like to hear about the catastrophes leading to Jobs disappearing faster than Trump can funnel Tax payer dollars into his own pockets back then, that made it comparable in any way.

best regards
Thomas

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 4:00 pm
by blueflyer
Do we seriously think that the DoD picks up the phone and calls the White House every time they're about to act in accordance with a policy long ago established that has survived multiple administrations from the left and the right? I can find fault with Trump and his administration all day every day, however I believe they can reasonably claim they were not aware of this issue.

Until now. Since Rep. Max Rose has made sure the president, or at least the White House, is aware of it, I expect action. Our civilian leadership should not micromanage military deployments by the unit, that should be the job of the military, however the civilian leadership should make it clear that potential benefits and budgetary savings from avoiding paying such benefits should not be a factor in scheduling individual units' deployments.

Re: White House Shafting Nat’l Guard Retirements To Save A Buck

Posted: Wed May 20, 2020 5:32 pm
by seb146
blueflyer wrote:
Do we seriously think that the DoD picks up the phone and calls the White House every time they're about to act in accordance with a policy long ago established that has survived multiple administrations from the left and the right? I can find fault with Trump and his administration all day every day, however I believe they can reasonably claim they were not aware of this issue.

Until now. Since Rep. Max Rose has made sure the president, or at least the White House, is aware of it, I expect action. Our civilian leadership should not micromanage military deployments by the unit, that should be the job of the military, however the civilian leadership should make it clear that potential benefits and budgetary savings from avoiding paying such benefits should not be a factor in scheduling individual units' deployments.


And, normally, this would be a non-issue. Under a normal administration (read: Obama and before) there would be some degree of outrage but it would fizzle out. Previous administrations know when to defer to experts.

This is not a normal administration.

One guy thinks he knows everything about everything and we should all just do what he wants because he says he is the expert. Add to that this whole notion of Republicans "we are hyper patriotic because we love the troops so much more than anyone" and, now, those same people are saying "yeah, well.... this is an administrative thing that always happens so who cares if troops lose benefits to save some money?"