Follow the latest on RallyPoint. Get insights from the top online professional network for service members and veterans.

Trending Discussions

36
36
0
Cdb89be8
With all the changes DoD is making to placate the minoritygroups (i.e. DADT repeal, grooming for certain groups) why has no one looked atthe officer/enlisted relationship issue. I totally get that is should not
happen within the unit (which should apply to enlisted/enlisted and officer/officer
as well) but if a enlisted troop happens
to meet a officer in a different command and neither could affect the others career,
then why is it still and issue? Not trying to change policy, just looking for
feedback.
150 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
36
36
0
5a4b4726
Is it the picture and RP Members, the title or subject and the title, the Tags (5) at the bottom or personal Tags (up to 20), or do you check out the top trending questions, shared links, or updates? PFC Donnie Walters CPT (Join to see) CWO3 (Join to see) SGT Lyndsay Hope Thomas Cpl Rebecca Burgess PFC (Join to see)
84 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
25
25
0
00522f6a
I'd like to hear from some Public Affairs Officer or NCOs on the policy in using military photos (like the one I pulled off the Internet for this question) in designing nonprofit web pages? A written policy would be great or any other information you can provide. ] PV2 (Join to see)
28 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
44
44
0
Acf18ae6
This one has come up a lot in conversations with my peers and Soldiers: Should you be allowed to claim veterans status if you have never deployed?

Personally, I'm an ROTC graduate who chose to go straight into the ARNG in 2011, knowing full well that my chances to deploy would be next to none with the changing op tempo. Realistically, had I been actively searching out a deployment the whole time, I still may not have gotten one. I'm sure there are Soldiers out there who served honorably in a reserve component without deploying, despite their best efforts. So, for example, should a Soldier who completed basic training, had a clean service record, excelled in their peer group, but ultimately served 10 years as a reservist with no deployment and less than 180 days on non-ADT active service be prevented from calling themselves a veteran?

I have my own thoughts, but I'm more interesting in hearing your opinions. For clarification, I'm speaking more towards the legal definition of veterans status - even if the laws were changed here, there would still be an immense difference between a legal veteran and a legal veteran with several deployments, combat experience, decades on active duty, or a combination of all three.
443 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
50
50
0
42e75d7a
I took my wife out to a nice restaurant after a day out in the filed. I was still in uniform unintentionally. A very generous man came up to my table when my wife was awy from the table and offered to cover our bill. I was stunned for a second and don't not know how to react, but I politely declined and thanked him for the generous offer.
I left feeling as if I should of let him pay for our meal, as that was a sign of an honorable thing to do for a solider. Long story short, I have mixed feelings about this. What do you all suggest.
185 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
7
7
0
F0446cbf
We pray daily, we say the pledge at meetings, we support celebrations honoring individuals and groups, and we are active every day dedicating ourselves to effectively help others in the best way possible: support groups, team centers, mentoring and networking. These are the positive ways I honor my Country. Lead by example to ensure the future for our families. What does that mean to you?
14 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
53
25
28
Bea59a0
The latest tragedy of gun violence against the LGBTQ community is just a continuance of the attack in the SC church, the campus shootings, Navy Yard assault, Theater attack, and assaults upon our children at schools. Assault weapons are the issue, not "guns." How do we fix this?
1009 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
5
5
0
I've been stationed overseas for the last 5 years so my mind is institutionalizes to Europe right now .
12 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
9
9
0
E03dac7a
Note: if you could email any addresses you'd recommend to [login to see] that would be a huge help!
10 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
Rp-logo-flat-shadow
Command Post What is this?
175
175
0
9f678308
Recently, at a military event in Washington D.C., I was struck by a feeling that something just wasn’t right. As the US flag was brought into the indoor event by an incredibly professional flag detail, all the civilian and military personnel rose and stood at the position of attention. Military personnel adjusted to continue facing the flag as the flag detail moved across the room. Then, the national anthem played and all of the military personnel remained at the position of attention while the civilians placed their hand over their heart. As a “Twice the Citizen” soldier, I felt conflicted and I couldn’t help but feel as though I was not paying the proper respect to the symbol of our nation. Shouldn’t I be doing something with my hand and my arm? Everything was in accordance with the military regulations that cover indoor ceremonies but, in my view, that didn’t make it right.

After 37 years of military service in all three components of the US Army (Active, National Guard and Army Reserve), I must admit I have a soft spot for Old Glory (the US flag) and for our national anthem. Some people might say I’m just a patriotic fool in view of all the challenges our nation currently faces. But to that I reply - we are a resilient nation of optimists who will find our way eventually and likely come out stronger than before. I am not convinced that standing at the position of attention, while all eyes are on the military, is the best way of paying our unequivocal respect to the symbol of our nation.

I’m a simple guy who believes in simple, yet powerful, concepts. What if every past and present military member always saluted Old Glory 100% of the time in a show of respect and solidarity - indoors or outdoors, rain or shine, with or without headgear? Past and present military members are bound by their service to our nation and this act of solidarity would further bind us to each other. Imagine never having to remember again which situation or circumstances dictated what to do when Old Glory passes or when the national anthem is played. Today, during a military or civilian parade when the US flag passes, veterans always rise, come to the position of attention, and salute. At a baseball game, when the national anthem is played, people rise to their feet, remove their headgear and place their hands over their hearts. What if all the veterans at the baseball game saluted instead of placing their hands over their hearts? Why not take the same approach, 100% of the time, for all events? I once had a drill sergeant who provided some sound advice when asked how often enlisted personnel should salute officers. That drill sergeant said, “You can’t go wrong if you salute 100% of the time.” So why not take that same, simple approach with Old Glory and our national anthem?

Have you ever asked yourself why military personnel don’t salute the US flag 100% of the time? I’m not sure how we got to where we are today with differences between indoor and outdoor events, and differences with and without headgear. Maybe it’s time to revisit and update those regulations. In this day and age, when military service is more rare than in generations past, isn’t it time for all veterans to band together in support of one another and in support of our country? Who knows the value of that symbol of our nation better than those who have fought to defend it? I think it’s time to salute Old Glory. As veterans, we have earned the right, and we have a solemn obligation to those who made the ultimate sacrifice to salute the symbol of our nation. Imagine being at your next event, and seeing all active duty and veteran military personnel saluting the US flag. How would that feel? I’m confident I would feel a tremendous amount of pride in seeing that solidarity and mutual outpouring of enduring respect for the symbol of our nation.

I believe all military members should start a grassroots effort to salute Old Glory 100% of the time. At my next military or civilian event, I intend to take the lead and salute Old Glory – will you join me?

---
This editorial is my personal opinion and does not reflect the views of the US Army Reserve, the US Army or the Department of Defense.
131 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
16
16
0
0217ee87
104 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
3
3
0
My best score was 285 last August at 32 years old in AIT.

68PU
82SU
13.34 run

PT is free !
8 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
19
14
5
Clarification: The question is about the impact on healthcare cost of routine barrage of threats that give rise to concern on the part of many citizens that their quality of life will be destroyed by discrimination sanctioned by a president who directly and indirectly sanctions discriminatory behaviors that would have been unthinkable under any president since slavery was abolished and women and minorities were granted right to vote. Fear of discriminatory acts is rampant.

The New PTSD: Post-Trump Stress Disorder
http://www.alternet.org/personal-health/new-ptsd-post-trump-stress-disorder

n.b. In spite of Trump's campaign promise to dismantle Obama's ACA - it would appear that he will retain most major portions of the ACA - including those portions guaranteeing coverage for previously uninsurable patients - and coverage for pre-existing conditions for otherwise insurable patients. The point of retaining these rather costly provisions of the ACA is to collect insurance premiums from patients whose care would otherwise fall to free government subsidized federal block grant supported community hospital / clinic care programs.
232 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
16
16
0
199fb127
So I've heard that a long time ago an evaluation of your MOS-competency, in addition to the board, was a part of getting promoted. I strongly feel something similar should come back. Being good at pt or knowing the regs are great but actually being knowledgeable in your MOS would seem to be just as important if not more so. Does the future look like it may return to this?
Posted in these groups: Star PromotionsPromotion_board_logo Promotion BoardExpertsights-e1324327272686 MOS
32 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
5
5
0
From: CNN

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump called Monday for barring all Muslims from entering the United States.

"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on," a campaign press release said.

Trump, who has previously called for surveillance against mosques and said he was open to establishing a database for all Muslims living in the U.S., made his latest controversial call in a news release. His message comes in the wake of a deadly mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, by suspected ISIS sympathizers and the day after President Barack Obama asked the country not to "turn against one another" out of fear.

Trump's comments are likely to roil the Republican presidential race, forcing many of his opponents for the nomination to engage in a debate over whether there should be a religious test to enter America.

But his proposal was met with enthusiasm by many of his supporters, who showed their approval via social media as well as at his rally on Monday night.

"I think that we should definitely disallow any Muslims from coming in. Any of them. The reason is simple: we can't identify what their attitude is," said 75-year-old Charlie Marzka of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.

Moreover, the Muslim travel ban will likely do little to dent Trump's own popularity among Republican primary voters. The billionaire businessman has dominated the GOP contest for months despite repeated controversies that would likely sink other White House hopefuls.

"Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine," Trump said in a statement. "Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life."

Trump's campaign added in the release that such a ban should remain in effect "until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on."

The release pointed to an online poll from the controversial Center for Security Policy, which claimed that a quarter of Muslims living in the U.S. believe violence against Americans is justified as part of a global jihadist campaign. Critics have questioned the reliability of the organization's information. It also pointed to a Pew Research poll, which the campaign declined to identify, which the campaign claimed points to "great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population."

Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski told CNN on Monday that the ban would apply not just to Muslim foreigners looking to immigrate to the U.S., but also to Muslims looking to visit the U.S. as tourists.

"Everyone," Lewandowski said when asked if the ban would also apply to Muslim tourists.

"Great surveillance and vigilance must be adhered to," said Trump in an additional statement Lewandowski provided to CNN. "We want to be very fair but too many bad things are happening and the percentage of true hatred is too great. People that are looking to destroy our country must be reported and turned in by the good people who love our country and want America to be great again."

Trump confirmed that his policy would not apply to current Muslims in the U.S. during a Fox News interview on Monday evening.

"I have Muslim friends, Greta, and they're wonderful people. But there's a tremendous section and cross-section of Muslims living in our country who have tremendous animosity," he told Fox News anchor Greta Van Susteren. "It does not apply to people living in the country, except we have to be vigilant."

Obama administration condemns proposal
Obama's deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes reacted to Trump's call Monday on CNN, calling it "totally contrary to our values as Americans" and pointed to the Bill of Rights' protection of freedom of religion and pointing to the "extraordinary contributions" Muslim Americans have made to the U.S.

"But it's also contrary to our security," Rhodes told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "The fact of the matter is ISIL wants to frame this as a war between the United States and Islam, and if we look like we're applying religious tests to who comes into this country, we're sending a message that essentially we're embracing that frame and that is going to make it very difficult to partner with Muslim communities here in the United States and around the world to prevent the scourge of radicalization that we should be focused on."

"We should make it harder for ISIL to portray this as a war between the United States and Islam, not easier," Rhodes added, using another acronym for ISIS, the radical Islamist group that controls swaths of Syria and Iraq and has called for terror attacks against the U.S.

Trump has beat back criticism in recent weeks that he is bigoted against Muslims, even telling CNN on Saturday when asked whether Muslims pose a danger to the U.S. that he thinks Muslims "are great people."

"I love the Muslims. I think they're great people," Trump told CNN in September.

And when he became tied to the idea of creating a database of all Muslims living in the U.S., Trump sought to distance himself from that proposal -- insisting that the idea was a reporter's and he was not committed to it.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, speaking to members of the Muslim community earlier in the afternoon, echoed the President's sentiment on Sunday warning against divisiveness.

"Bitterness grows out of hopelessness, and there is no hopelessness in this situation, however uncomfortable and menacing it may be at times," he said. "Faith in the ultimate strength of the democratic philosophy and code of the Nation as a whole has always been stronger than the impulse to despair"

Republicans react
It didn't take long for the rest of the Republican presidential primary field to repudiate Trump's call.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie slammed Trump's proposal in a radio interview.

"This is the kind of thing that people say when they have no experience and don't know what they are talking about. We do not need to resort to that type of activity nor should we," Christie said on the Michael Medved radio show. "What we need to do is to increase our intelligence activities. We need to cooperate with peaceful Muslim Americans who want to give us intelligence against those who are radicalized."

And South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham called on every presidential candidate to "do the right thing & condemn @Realdonaldtrump's statement."

Graham later told CNN that Trump's rhetoric "is putting our troops serving abroad and our diplomats at risk."

"For interpreters and others risking their lives abroad to help America -- this is a death sentence," Graham said.

Graham just returned from a trip to visit troops in the Middle East and said from troops and allies there expressed concerns over Trump's rhetoric.

Graham said he assured them that Trump is in the minority, but Graham said Monday Trump's latest proposal makes it harder to convince them of that.

Another GOP presidential contender, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, said, "‎That is not my policy."

"I have introduced legislation in the Senate that would put in place a three year moratorium on refugees coming from countries where ISIS or al Qaeda control a substantial amount of territory. And the reason is that is where the threat is coming from," Cruz said as he was leaving a South Carolina field office.

In a statement, Ohio Gov. John Kasich said, "This is just more of the outrageous divisiveness that characterizes his every breath and another reason why he is entirely unsuited to lead the United States."

And former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush tweeted that Trump is "unhinged."

"Donald Trump is unhinged. His "policy" proposals are not serious," he said.

Former neurosurgeon Ben Carson also said is opposed to placing a religious test on U.S. visitors.

"Everyone visiting our country should register and be monitored during their stay as is done in many countries. I do not and would not advocate being selective on one's religion," he said in a statement.

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul's campaign did not explicitly refute Trump's proposal.

"Sen. Rand Paul has led on the issue of border security, proposing real solutions. That's why earlier this month he introduced legislation to block visitors and immigrants from nations with known radical elements while a new system is developed to screen properly," said Sergio Gor, Paul's communications director, in a statement.

Former tech CEO Carly Fiorina said Trump's "overreaction" is as bad as Obama's "under reaction."

"President Obama isn't prepared to do anything, which is clearly foolish, but Donald Trump always plays on everyone's worst instincts and fears. And saying we're not going to let a single Muslim into this country is a dangerous overreaction," she said during a gaggle with reporters in Waterloo, Iowa.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said he disagrees with Trump.

"(Trump's) habit of making offensive and outlandish statements will not bring Americans together. The next president better be somebody who can unite our country to face the great challenges of the 21st Century," he said in a statement.

Former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore tweeted, "Trump's fascist talk drives all minorities from GOP."

And former Vice President Dick Cheney, speaking with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, said such a policy goes against the spirit of America.

"This whole notion that somehow we can just say no more Muslims, just ban a whole religion, goes against everything we stand for and believe in," he said. "I mean, religious freedom has been a very important part of our history and where we came from."

Democrats slam Trump
Democrats were quick to condemn Trump's call, with two of the three Democratic presidential candidates calling Trump a "demagogue."

".@realdonaldtrump removes all doubt: he is running for President as a fascist demagogue," tweeted Democratic presidential candidate Martin O'Malley, the former governor of Maryland.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont also slammed Trump as a demagogue and suggested Trump's rhetoric would make the U.S. weaker.

"Demagogues throughout our history have attempted to divide us based on race, gender, sexual orientation or country of origin. Now, Trump and others want us to hate all Muslims. The United States is a great nation when we stand together. We are a weak nation when we allow racism and xenophobia to divide us," Sanders said in a statement.

Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, in a signed message, tweeted, "This is reprehensible, prejudiced and divisive. @RealDonaldTrump, you don't get it. This makes us less safe. -H"

And the Democratic National Committee sought to align the GOP as a whole alongside Trump.

"Donald Trump is indeed a 'net positive' for the Republican Party -- as their chairman called him -- because he shows America what the Republican Party really stands for with his rhetoric that only helps enemies like ISIL/Daesh to recruit extremists," said DNC spokeswoman Christina Freundlich.

Trump's call for a shutdown of Muslim immigration in the U.S. came hours before he was set to speak aboard the U.S.S. Yorktown, a World War II era ship parked near Charleston, South Carolina.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/
Posted in these groups: Donald_trump Donald Trump6262122778_997339a086_z PoliticsIslam_logo Islam
49 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small
101
101
0
7aeb4825
122e054d
3f1bc704
I have noticed in recent years, at the cleaners I use personally and for our program dry cleaning, that many Soldiers bring in their Class-As and all their bling, and pay to have a them (likely by a military spouse or high school kid) set up their uniforms for DA photos, boards, and inspections... Yesterday I saw a Captain paying to have his Class-As set-up, and thought to myself WTF? A Captain, seriously?

I have worn the uniform since 1980, and still set in up myself? I always have. I always spit-shinned my own boots (daily) and even did at Jump School. I ironed my own uniforms for duty (yes I know we were not supposed to), and if I had questions, I asked a 1SG/CSM.

Anytime I needed a DA photo, I asked my 1SG or CSM to check my uniform and my photo. And, luckily, I got promoted/selected at every board...

I still can't believe Soldiers pay to have someone else do this, as I see this as a personal responsibility... But, capitalism makes it work... I guess after black boots and endless sewing on the Greens and BDUs... this is new market.

I guess I am just old school...

PS. I have a lot of crap on my uniform...
267 people commented on this discussion.
Avatar_small

Are you sure you wish to convert this post?

Seg?add=7750261&t=2