A member of a uniformed service may be entitled to Hostile Fire and Imminent Danger pay at the rate of $225 for any month in which he/she was entitled to .......
It has most vets fired up and 'spittin mad' over Obama's contempt for the military and that he is limiting their 'Combat Pay' From what I gather they want to pro-rate it for the days ($7.50 a day) of the month you are actually being shot at which means it will be up to some pencil pusher to determine what that means. When I received combat pay if you were in country 1 day out of the month you got the full amount for the month and trust me it was not worth $225 for one minute of getting shot at let alone a month. Combat Pay also means you are tax exempt for the month, which I guess would change also.
What really gets me is the government will spend billions to feed and give health care to illegals, bail out wall street and cash for clunkers while depriving those who are laying their life on the line for our country.
I would encourage the scum suckers in Washington to stand down range for 24 Hrs and get shot at an see if it's worth $7.50 to them.
It is sickening. Clinton had the same ideas until HE wanted to send troops to Bosnia. THEN he was all in favor of keeping the troops happy.
ReplyDeleteIt sure has a lot of vets ticked off.
DeleteI read this earlier today. Makes me want to vomit.
ReplyDeleteI agree, sometimes I think they can't stoop any lower and then this happens.
DeleteSonabitches...
ReplyDeleteMy sentiments exactly
DeleteI knew something like this was coming after NDAA declared N. America a battlefield. They would have to redifine a battlefield or give all military stationed in the USA combat pay.
ReplyDeleteGood point, I think the military keeps a list though of areas of operation that qualify for hostile pay.
DeleteThis is another sad day in our country. These men (and women) are underpaid as it is for the sacrifices they make to go to another country. Most of the time they do not even know who is friend or foe.
ReplyDeleteI agree Mamma Bear. Thanks.
DeleteI need a place to practice... moving targets sound good to me. I'll pay them $7.50 for a day :)
ReplyDeleteMe to Kellie....me to.
DeleteNot being a veteran, I try and tread lightly on these issues, but it certainly sounds like a screw job to me.
ReplyDeleteI hope that it will serve as a wake up call to those still serving that may be confused when it comes time to where they are ordered to confiscate our weapons as to who the enemy really is... not the US citizens. It's those giving the orders.
Matt, It is different than what has been the norm in the past. It's not fair to change the rules on them now.
Deleteoh no not suggesting that at all. Just the very fact that the government is doing this to begin with is all I'm saying.
DeleteTotally in your corner on this.
Matt, Understood. Thanks.
DeleteCouple of technical issues...
ReplyDelete1... its days in zone.. meaning its going to take effect when you go boots on ground, and stop the day you leave theater... its not going to be "days spent outside the wire" or "number of days you actually got shot at out of the month. Arrive in Afg= start getting 7.50 a day.. leave Afg... it stops
2 Combat pay is not the same as Tax exclusion... Tax exclusion is a separate roster... thats how the AF is tax free in kyrgyzstan and not receiving combat pay.. one does not automatically guarantee the other, and they dont overlap 100% Tax exclusion is still based on the month you arrive depart.. arrive on the 30/31, the whole month is tax free.. leave on the first.. whole month is still tax free.
.. From a guy that actually got the DFAS/MyPay email...
Anonymous, I understand it is days in combat zone but in 2004 we got it when we first set foot in Kuwait, before we got to Iraq. For us tax exclusion was tied to the same criteria as combat pay. The raw deal about the whole thing is it is now up to interpretation by some pencil pusher stateside who can decide to move the combat theater lines or even interpret it to mean days outside the wire.
DeleteOf course I did see some Generals who would show up in country on the 30th of the month and stay till the 1st and collect 2 months combat pay and they would never leave the wire (even though we did get a lot of rockets inside the wire) They would repeat this every other month.
Then what about the pilots who fly in once a week, getting shot at, it really screws them.
This is just outrageous! I'm not a vet, however both parents served in WWII and my brother and both late husbands served here and in Germany. I just cannot believe what this POTUS is doing to our military and congress just stands by and lets him. Grrrr. AND $7.50 a day is disgraceful. All while congress sits on their duffs and gets hundreds of thousands. Oh I had better quit my rant before I pop a blood vessel! :) God bless our Veterans and those serving now.
ReplyDeleteBlessings!
Cotton Lady, I know it makes me mad as well.
DeleteAnother reason why the I.I.C. (idiot in charge) or what ever his title is has got to go.
ReplyDeleteWe also need to clean house in Congress. Our vets do not get paid enough....
Amen Rob. Thanks.
DeleteThat's pretty goofy. It's a dangerous path to go down.
ReplyDeletewhen i think of my brothers who are serving overseas being dilly-dallied about like this - it makes my blood boil! and Dear Duke, you understand why i have to finish this comment here...oh there is so much more that i want to say.
ReplyDeleteyour friend,
kymber - an army vet.
Kymber, I understand sister. Thanks.
DeleteI hope there is a very special kind of hell waiting for the Big O.
ReplyDeleteAutumnest, I tend to agree. Thanks.
DeleteThis is so wrong on so many levels! I agree with you - send them down range for a while!!!
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely, Thanks for the support.
Delete"I would encourage the scum suckers in Washington to stand down range for 24 Hrs and get shot at an see if it's worth $7.50 to them."
ReplyDeleteIt's called execution by firing squad. An older tradition but not without merit. They used to have a whole bunch of shooters and only a couple of them would have real bullets. The rest were firing blanks. That way none of the shooters could be held truly accountable. In this case however I think they'd probably do away with the blanks.
Ausprepper, I agree, some of them should be tried for treason.
ReplyDelete