Muscatine

Nice job of making things up

The signed contract does not say they have to serve out the terms of their enlistment exclusively. It says they will retain their bonuses if injured during the line of duty unless the injury was the result of a pre-existing condition.

And this has been going on for the past few years and is being noticed now because we have been engaged in combat only for the past few years. When this has been brought up to the military and veterans affairs officials they had been turning a blind eye (like you are) and citing everything as pre-existing condition.

And it is so like you to try to bring politics into this. Even JOS's original post stated it politics shouldn't matter.

I'd ask if you're always a bonehead or if this is just a special day for you but I've read enough of your previous babble that I already know the answer.

You Sir, are a loser. You have proven that matters of deep importance to veterans do not matter to you so do not be surprised that as a veteran I find you a coward and extremely unpatriotic. This issue has nothing to do with your so called ''this is my muse'' bickering about politics. Making a veterans misery into a part of your self proclaimed little game is disgusting.

-caller

Where


Where did you come up with the idea I made something up?

See this -> ?

Its a question mark. I asked a question. But apparently you can't see that through your indignance.

So when liberals say its alright to question someone or something...that means anyone except them, right?

BTW



BTW...your first paragraph about what the agreement says is wrong. DA Form 4789 for the Army re-enlistment bonus program says nothing of pre-existing conditions. Those words do not even exist on the form.

Being armed with misinformation is dangerous and wrong.

You can look up the form here on the Army's website:

http://www.army.mil/usapa/eforms/DA4475-R_to_DA4831-R_1.html

Just click the .pdf file under that form number and then you'll learn the reasons for disqualification. Being injured in the line of duty through no misconduct of your own does not disqualify you.

Somehow, you seem to think I'm attacking injured veterans. Exactly opposite.

However, your posting of misinformation as you just did can do some real damage. I guess since the form does not say what you said it does...that would make your statement....delusional...and a lie.
And since I'm one of the veterans that you just lied to, I'll wait to see your apology, caller.

OK

To answer both of your questions:

''So if the ''legal and binding contract'' says one must serve out their enlistment to retain re-enlistment bonuses...what does that mean to you, bright-boy bob?''

Hmmm, lets see. You asked a question but used a made up scenario. The question was ''what does that mean to you bright-boy bob? You wrote it down literally and I took it literally. Your version of the ''legal and binding contract'' in your scenario is made up.

''Its a question mark. I asked a question. But apparently you can't see that through your indignance.''

Seems I saw it just fine.

''So when liberals say its alright to question someone or something...that means anyone except them, right?''

You've totally lost it. I told you in no uncertain terms that this has nothing to do with any politics. I think those two remaining cells in your brain have collided one time too many. I don't give a damn about your petty political bickering. I do give a damn about you playing your pointless little game by using veteran issues you know and care nothing about.

And, I've got a link too -

http://www.armyg1.army.mil/docs/public%20affairs/Ch%205-13%20fact%20sheet%2015Jun07.pdf

Now go ahead and continue if you wish. You are a fool and a loser and your responses have proven it to anybody who cares to read these posts. There isn't a thing you can say to change this to make you look any less idiotic. But feel free to try. Make your tiny little ego proud. You can walk away from this thread feeling like a real winner...