4 ms·
> You're not allowed to say disparaging things about anyone in your command chain, which goes up to the president. There's also limits on your political speech,
by Diesel555 5y ago
> You're not allowed to say disparaging things about anyone in your command chain, which goes up to the president. There's also limits on your political speech, in relation to making political statements in favor of candidates.
You are right, there are more restrictions for me. I'll change my evaluation of "you sign away all your citizenship rights" to mostly false. The OP made a rather encompassing assertion. I still retain most of my rights as a US citizen.
For anyone reading this that is curious, we do agree to a new law code. It's the Uniform Code of Military Justice. One aspect is that it ensures service members are held accountable to laws in countries where there may be drastically different laws. It also includes provisions such as article 88 which states:
> Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
And article 89 also limits speech more than an average citizen.
> not everyone gets the GI bill benefits they are promised
I'd be curious to hear the facts behind this assertion. The regulations are pretty clear on how to qualify. I've never seen someone qualified then denied.
- ryan_lane 5y ago> I'd be curious to hear the facts behind this assertion. The regulations are pretty clear on how to qualify. I've never seen someone qualified then denied. https://www.history.com/news/gi-bill-black-wwii-veterans-benefits https://www.history.com/news/gi-bill-black-wwii-veterans-ben... https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/11/5/22765623/veterans-affairs-gibill-post-911-gi-bill-whistleblower-nicholas-griffo-defense-department https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/11/5/22765623/veterans-aff...
- Diesel555 5y agoThe first article is for a completely different benefit. The GI Bill from WW2, the Montgomery GI Bill, and the Post 9/11 GI bill are completely different things. To be clear - the article reports on a great injustice and it's sad to read about. I had no idea. Thank you for showing it. The second article is specific to the reserves and guard. The main point I gather is that the process of evaluating time served is flawed and caused mistakes which made members a) lose their benefits even if they were currently using them and b) place the burden and costs on the service member to resolve. I'll restrict my statement to active duty only.