Johnny Sunset said:Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <[email hidden]>
> ,
> "Johnny Sunset" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> > Michael Press wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <[email hidden]>,
> > > "Johnny Sunset" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Michael Press wrote:
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <[email hidden]>,
> > > > > "Johnny Sunset" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Michael Press wrote:
> > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > <[email hidden]>,
> > > > > > > "Johnny Sunset" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Michael Press wrote:
> > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > <[email hidden]>
> > > > > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > > > "Johnny Sunset" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Readers of rec.bicycles.tech:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > So Peter Chisholm believes only those who are willing to subject
> > > > > > > > > > themselves unquestioningly to arbitrary authority AND those who believe
> > > > > > > > > > in violence as a way to solve problems should be allowed to run for
> > > > > > > > > > president.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Rhetoric from one who has no experience in the
> > > > > > > > > military. You have no idea. All that emotion, and no
> > > > > > > > > substance. It's like reading a crack pot in sci.math
> > > > > > > > > lecturing tenured professors on mathematics.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Mr. Press:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ah yes, another "I'm superior because I was in the military lecture"
> > > > > > > > combined with implied insult. [Yawn]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > See my reply to Bill Sornson.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Do you deny the military requires unquestioning obedience to authority?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You must obey a lawful order given by a police officer.
> > > > > > > Commissioned officers and non-commissioned officers
> > > > > > > have better things to do than micro-manage their troops.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The authority of police officers is limited to enforcing laws. A
> > > > > > commanding officer can control every minute of a subordinates life if
> > > > > > he/she so desires.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Try being open-minded enough to realize that those who prefer to
> > > > > > > > maintain the option of thinking for themselves and self-determination
> > > > > > > > also have something to offer to society.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Everybody knows me as a dupe of the most recent special
> > > > > > > interest group to persuade me with their program.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You ever watch movies that trade in a subject you have
> > > > > > > mastered? Sickening, is it not? You talk as if
> > > > > > > everything you know about the military you got from
> > > > > > > movies.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I was never claiming to be an expert in military life. However, some
> > > > > > things are evident based on deduction from available (and basically
> > > > > > undisputed) facts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you dispute that there is little alternative but to obey an order
> > > > > > given by a commanding officer when one is on active duty service?
> > > > >
> > > > > Sure. That commanding officer is going to have trouble
> > > > > when his efficiency reports are written and he comes up
> > > > > for promotion.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Is not the ultimate purpose of the military to settle disputes by
> > > > > > violent means?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah, whatever.
> > > > >
> > > > > You deduce, argue, and dispute from your facts, but you
> > > > > do not know.
> > > >
> > > > Readers of rec.bicycles.tech:
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Press [1] fails to contradict with facts my point about the
> > > > relative lack of control over one's life in military service compared
> > > > to civilian life, and also does not answer the question about the
> > > > ultimate purpose of the military.
> > > >
> > > > [1] Your opportunity to complain about third person reference, Mr.
> > > > Sornson.
> > >
> > > I failed to contradict fact. Now _there_ is an
> > > indictment. You talk and argue and dispute, but you do
> > > not know.
> > >
> > > I reckon that most people in the military have better
> > > control over their lives than you do.
> >
> > Really? Are military personnel at will to quit the military anytime
> > they want?
>
> Military people sign contracts, the same as civilians.
> The contracts can be renegotiated, the same as
> civilians.
Readers of rec.bicycles.tech:
Most employees in many countries (in particular the US) have no
contract, but are at will employees. For example, I have the right to
walk off my job at any time, and similarly, my employer has the right
to terminate my employment without notice, and for any reason other
than those specifically prohibited by law.
Do US soldiers in Iraq have the ability to terminate their contracts
and leave the service? I think not. In fact, the Department of Defense
has issued "stop loss" order requiring soldiers to serve BEYOND their
contractually agreed upon term.
> > Do civilians get sent to jail if they quit their jobs?
>
> Civilians also suffer the consequences of breaking a
> contract.
Except for a few high level professional positions in the US (since
this discussion started out with the US as the relevant country),
contractual arrangements for employees in the US are almost unheard of.
The only action that can be taken against an "at will" employee for
quitting a job is denying unemployment compensation payments.
> The military prefers to discharge any person
> that prefers not to be there, rather than housing and
> feeding him.
Not if it wants to set an example to keep other soldiers fighting in an
unpopular war (e.g. Iraq).
> That discharge under less than honorable
> conditions may eventually persuade the recipient that
> he would rather have spent the remainder of his
> enlistment in the stockade than be refused those jobs
> on civvy street.
A very different situation from leaving a job in civilian employment -
especially if one accepts a job offers from a new employer before
quitting the current job (a common and accepted practice in the US).
> But this is all legalese. A man gives his word, and
> lives up to it.
And women...?
What if the other party makes false or misleading promises? Is the man
or woman still bound by his or her promise?
Yes.
