| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 5:58 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| contrarian wrote: |
My middle son (I'm old) just qualified to join the Canadian Army. He has an 18" Titanium rod attached to his spine from scoliosis. He just finished basic and is doing his next step in Armor.
He wants to go to Afghanistan. . . .
 |
By no means do I disbelieve you, I'm just curious. How was your son allowed in? I was kicked from the recruitment process the moment they learned I had previously dislocated a shoulder... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I know he had tried several times before. He is quite fit and has a 2nd degree black belt in Tae Kwon do. There are some moves at the top level that his rigid spine makes impossible. He has most of a university degree and I expct that helps |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgeezer
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Soldiers are never to blame for startingor contonuing a war....it's the cowards who send these young boys and girls to do their dirty work and unfinished business.....
To bad the Bush twins and other government litters couln't be sent into combat, otherwise America would never be in another global conflict ever (unless invaded of course) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mcgeezer, if you believe that you are a fool, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgeezer
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| beleive which part?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 2:32 am Post subject: Re: The Mobile Infantry Made Me What I Am Today! |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
| [. As I've said, I'm of two minds. On the one hand, it's good that people who want to serve are allowed to. On the other hand, I think it shows that the military today needs so many bodies at work that they will take folk back who once were not considered "able." It's a little disturbing, I thought it was worth a comment. |
On the one hand I agree with you.
On the other I have to disagree. I do not think it is disturbing and here is why. In the past as you said, disabled people were not allowed to serve even if they wished. This was in LARGE part because of a perjorative attitude towards the disabled in the past. They were not considered able to perform their jobs even if after some time to heal they were able to.
I think this shows a much better attitude towards the disabled in today's society. They have earned the right to make the choice (they always have had the RIGHT, of course, but until recently were unable to use it because of the perjorative attitude that I mentioned before) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cangel
Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Location: Jeonju, S. Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| As I previously mentioned, why is a double amputee able to reenlist and a fat @ss totally unable to enlist? Seems to me there are tons of support positions, rear-echelon puke positions that could be staffed by wide-bodies. Oh, and I am not talking sumo-sized b@stards here, just guys who had a few too many chili cheese fries with their diet coke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cangel wrote: |
| As I previously mentioned, why is a double amputee able to reenlist and a fat @ss totally unable to enlist? Seems to me there are tons of support positions, rear-echelon puke positions that could be staffed by wide-bodies. Oh, and I am not talking sumo-sized b@stards here, just guys who had a few too many chili cheese fries with their diet coke. |
I accuse you of trying to trivialize a discussion that so far has been serious by comparing amputation to people who like chili cheese fries.
I've been called fat, many times, myself. It's ugly to put it anywhere close to someone who has already displayed the ability to make sacrifices for people he has not and will never meet, and then wants to do it again.
You think this is a joke. A lot of us do not. Please, stop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2007 10:31 am Post subject: Re: The Mobile Infantry Made Me What I Am Today! |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| The Bobster wrote: |
| [. As I've said, I'm of two minds. On the one hand, it's good that people who want to serve are allowed to. On the other hand, I think it shows that the military today needs so many bodies at work that they will take folk back who once were not considered "able." It's a little disturbing, I thought it was worth a comment. |
On the one hand I agree with you.
On the other I have to disagree. I do not think it is disturbing and here is why. In the past as you said, disabled people were not allowed to serve even if they wished. This was in LARGE part because of a perjorative attitude towards the disabled in the past. They were not considered able to perform their jobs even if after some time to heal they were able to.
I think this shows a much better attitude towards the disabled in today's society. They have earned the right to make the choice (they always have had the RIGHT, of course, but until recently were unable to use it because of the perjorative attitude that I mentioned before) |
Actually, I think this is one of those rare times when we agree completely ... I DO think the manpower shortage plays into it, though, at least a little. They need people to put on a uniform, and it's not a popular war, so they are putting people back in uniform who have already been injured, which is a new policy.
Almost NO ONE in America thinks we are doing the right thing by being there. People seem to be figuring out that it's not good for America.
So, maybe it's time to end this thing. End it now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's not new policy.
Returning the injured to combat and non-combat position has always been policy.
It was just more popular to opt for disability, it pays to be disabled.
It's not new, it's just news.
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cbclark4 wrote: |
| It's not new policy. |
I guess you didn't read the article ...
| |
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
