BBC: General Defends Court Martial for Pregnant Soldiers

[Redd]

Should be legal imo. When you sign up you're property of the USA. Shouldn't be a problem for the military just because you're knocked up.

[ZoEd]

Stop being a tool. Why not tell the whole story. Oh I forgot, because it would make you WRONG.

Here is a quote that applies to you

Now for the rest of the story as the late Paul Harvey would say

Mailgering is punishable under UCMJ, I reccommended a soldier for an article 15 for Malingering.

Once agian someone with experience in military law unlike you.

Once again your lack of experience shows. Read and heed.

Honestly, I was waiting for you to come back with the exact thing you did.

Outstanding post all the way around. Very, very well played.

I will also add that a female may not be prosecuted for being pregnant but she, and he for that matter, can still be prosecuted for Article 92, failure to obey a direct order.

If they're NCO's they can also be administratively demoted for not meeting up to NCO standards. An administrative demotion doesn't require a court martial or even "evidence", all a commander has to prove is that they're just not good NCO's.

There's a lot of administrative tools a Commander has at his or her disposal that can have some extremely adverse effects on ones career without ever court martialing them.

[JMS]

Stop being a tool. Why not tell the whole story. Oh I forgot, because it would make you WRONG.

Here is a quote that applies to you.

Yep, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him read the headline of the story in which the general crawfished on what he said. Sure you can read between the line and call names all you like. Make it personal rather than face the fact you are wrong. When you get owned, change tactics and try to ignore it. It works in Egypt... the land of DENIAL...

Guy... The entire story is this general stated he would start to court marshal women for being pregnant. Then that got back to the United States, and it hit the national news...

THE NEXT DAY THE GENERAL RECINDED WHAT HE HAD SAID!!! "I would never actually court marshal women for being pregnant"!

Read between the lines all you like. That's the state of events.

I stated this policy was going nowhere, it would never happen. It's a stupid policy which makes sense myopically but is assinine when viewed in it's totality.

Sure it's a serious subject.

Sure the military is bumbed when it happens.

Sure they want to make it a stigma.

Absolutely they want to cut down on these incidents.

Prosecute or criminalize women for pregancy... not going to happen. Never was going to happen.

That's the entire story... beginning middle and end....

Tool indeed.

[twa]

I don't see where he rescinded what he said at all

He included the infraction on a list of violations that COULD lead to a court martial.

He still intends to keep it that way,despite clarifying that he would not seek jail time,and the punishments would be below that level

Shoddy reporting and assumptions being made,along with a (probably on purpose) lack of detail from the general.

The general said that since his Nov. 4 policy went into effect, four women and three men have been found in violation of it.

Wanna bet it continues to be dealt with?

[ZoEd]

Yep, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him read the headline of the story in which the general crawfished on what he said. Sure you can read between the line and call names all you like. Make it personal rather than face the fact you are wrong. When you get owned, change tactics and try to ignore it. It works in Egypt... the land of DENIAL...

Guy... The entire story is this general stated he would start to court marshal women for being pregnant. Then that got back to the United States, and it hit the national news...

THE NEXT DAY THE GENERAL RECINDED WHAT HE HAD SAID!!! "I would never actually court marshal women for being pregnant"!

Read between the lines all you like. That's the state of events.

I stated this policy was going nowhere, it would never happen. It's a stupid policy which makes sense myopically but is assinine when viewed in it's totality.

Sure it's a serious subject.

Sure the military is bumbed when it happens.

Sure they want to make it a stigma.

Absolutely they want to cut down on these incidents.

Prosecute or criminalize women for pregancy... not going to happen. Never was going to happen.

That's the entire story... beginning middle and end....

Tool indeed.

The only person who got owned was you JMS. You're quoting the headline where Sacase quoted actual quotes from the article. So the General isn't going to pursue jail time for women getting pregnant in the AOR, key word being the AOR which you convieniently keep overlooking while trying to prove your uninformed view. Doesn't mean he can't and wont pursue Art 15 proceedings for violation of Article 92, failure to obey a direct order for disobeying GO1 or if there's enough evidence that they got pregnant to avoid their duty then he can pursue Art 115, Malingering. What you fail to realize is #1 How stupid people are when they go around blabbing their intentions to people and #2 How "persuasive" First Sergeants can be in getting information against you when building a case.

Why is it that anytime a thread is started discussing things in the miltary you fail to listen to those who either are currently serving or have served? We're telling you the way it is in our world yet you chose to argue against it till you're blue in the face. You've ducked every FACT I've given you in regards to the tools a Commander has at his disposal that can and is used on a regualar basis.

I think the point the Commander was trying to make is enoug is enough with women getting pregnant in the AOR which is a violation of GO1 and impedes the mission by being sent home. So maybe the women won't get jail time, okay you win on that one. Yea JMS! However, Article 15's don't carry jail time anyway, so in lieu of Court Martial he just Art 15's their asses, takes some stripes, money, extra duty and restrictions on liberty. After that's all said and done he can either process them for discharge or refuse re-enlistment when their time is up eliminating them from service.

Then again what would I know? I mean, I've only been in the military for 20 years and a First Sergeant. :doh:

TWA, I guarantee it continues to get dealt with. No General is going to get punked out by the media that's for sure. Talk about disrupting Good Order and Discipline. He'll deal with it in a way that may get him out of the media spotlight but still deals with the issue in a very effective manner, like all the ways I've listed time and time again in this thread that JMS keeps ignoring.

Speaking of ownage and ignoring; JMS, how many troops are still in Iraq? Guess I didn't know what I was talking about then either.

[JMS]

I don't see where he rescinded what he said at all

Well let me help you then. On the 20th he says he will start to court marshal women for pregnancy... On the 22nd he says he never considered actually court marshalling women for this... Then goes on to say of the four women who did turn up pregnant since his policy went into effect. NONE WERE COURT MARSHALLED, NONE RECIEVED A PERMANENT REPROMAND IN THEIR FILE.

First Story. Sunday, 20 December 2009

A US Army general in northern Iraq has defended his decision to add pregnancy to the list of reasons a soldier under his command could face court martial.

Second Story. Tuesday 22 December 2009.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jXwXb_LkLyiN0x9imczUUBREedjgD9COIFSG1

A U.S. general in Iraq who listed pregnancy as a reason for court-martialing soldiers said Tuesday that he would never actually seek to jail someone over the offense, but wanted to underline the seriousness of the issue.

....

the policy was intended to emphasize the problems created when pregnant soldiers go home and leave behind a weaker unit.

....

"I have never considered court-martial for this, I do not ever see myself putting a soldier in jail for this," said Cucolo

....

"If you are a pregnant female in a combat zone, you are redeployed, period. That is actually not my call, that is just what we do," he said

...

[twa]

Well let me help you then. On the 20th he says he will start to court marshal women for pregnancy...

No... he added it to the list that COULD result in court martial.

Unless you have some facts not already anyway.

[JMS]

The only person who got owned was you JMS. You're quoting the headline where Sacase quoted actual quotes from the article. So the General isn't going to pursue jail time for women getting pregnant in the AOR, key word being the AOR which you convieniently keep overlooking while trying to prove your uninformed view.

Actually He's quoteing military policy which to date has not been applied to pregnancy. I am quoting the statements of the general before and after he made national news.

The general says he will courtmarshal. He's on the evening news... Then he says he's never considered court marshalling and hasn't court marshalled women since he wrote the new policy.

So maybe the women won't get jail time, okay you win on that one. Yea JMS! However, Article 15's don't carry jail time anyway, so in lieu of Court Martial he just Art 15's their asses, takes some stripes, money, extra duty and restrictions on liberty. After that's all said and done he can either process them for discharge or refuse re-enlistment when their time is up eliminating them from service.

The discussion wasn't jail time. Or what he could do. The discussion is what he proposed and defended doing; Court Marshalling. I said it would never happen, and now the general agrees with me. Evidently he never considered doing it, and hasn't done it up to this point.

TWA, I guarantee it continues to get dealt with. No General is going to get punked out by the media that's for sure.

:doh: How do you even answer that? It's just devoid of reality which we live in. What general important enough to be noticed by the national media has had to change his policies/behavior when push came to shove?

Patton, McArther, Bradley Hallsey, Westmoreland, Boorda, Fallon, Macke?

There are eight I can name off the top of my head.

Talk about disrupting Good Order and Discipline. He'll deal with it in a way that may get him out of the media spotlight but still deals with the issue in a very effective manner, like all the ways I've listed time and time again in this thread that JMS keeps ignoring.

Only in the article he states 4 women have violated his policy since it's inception and non has faced court marshall or any permanent mark on their record.

Speaking of ownage and ignoring; JMS, how many troops are still in Iraq? Guess I didn't know what I was talking about then either.

Very true. You called that one.

[JMS]

The easiest is to just say they are gay..

Coarse that avenue is likely closed to you if you turn up pregnant.

[twa]

Coarse that avenue is likely closed to you if you turn up pregnant.

The Turkey Baster defense is still available as a last resort.

[ZoEd]

Actually He's quoteing military policy which to date has not been applied to pregnancy. I am quoting the statements of the general before and after he made national news.

The general says he will courtmarshal. He's on the evening news... Then he says he's never considered court marshalling and hasn't court marshalled women since he wrote the new policy.

The discussion wasn't jail time. Or what he could do. The discussion is what he proposed and defended doing; Court Marshalling. I said it would never happen, and now the general agrees with me. Evidently he never considered doing it, and hasn't done it up to this point.

:doh: How do you even answer that? It's just devoid of reality which we live in. What general important enough to be noticed by the national media has had to change his policies/behavior when push came to shove?

Patton, McArther, Bradley Hallsey, Westmoreland, Boorda, Fallon, Macke?

There are eight I can name off the top of my head.

Only in the article he states 4 women have violated his policy since it's inception and non has faced court marshall or any permanent mark on their record.

Very true. You called that one.

Actually you quoted him saying that he would never send anyone to jail for this. Article 15 doesn't carry jail time and isn't PERMANENT on your record as far as promotion is considered which is all that matters. Neither are reprimands or administrative actions. Again, like I've said at leat 5 times already, he may not have ever considered prosecuting someone for getting pregnant but he still can prosecute for Art 92 and Art 115. You get it yet? It's the state trooper tactic, "I'm not going to give you a ticket for wreckless driving so here's one for speeding".

His statement probably got him a little heat from the JAG but he is still fully within his rights as a commander to prosecute for the other infractions that goes along with getting knocked up in the war zone. Are you smelling the poop we're stepping in?

You don't know Commanding officers very well do you? Sure they might get smacked down publicly by your friends the "civilians". Fine, still doesn't mean he's going to endure looking like a punk to his troops. Once a Commander loses credibility amongst his troops he's sunk. You ever hear of **** rolls down hill? The **** will roll down hill, you can count on that. What you fail to realize is that the normal rules of society aren't the same as the rules in the military world. A commander has the luxury of setting policy and making up his own rules, again the military isn't a democracy.

Thanks for acknowledging that not only was I right but we're not going anywhere anytime soon either. We're still building up bases in Iraq but Joe American is so focused on the HC scam and Afghanistan they've forgotten all about Iraq. We live in a society infected with ADD when it comes to politics.

[JMS]

Actually you quoted him saying that he would never send anyone to jail for this.

I quoted him the second time saying he would never court marshall a woman for being pregnant. That he has never considered doing so. that he has not done so nor permanently effected the women under his command who have gotten pregnant up to this point, even after he signed his policy in mid November.

like I've said at leat 5 times already, he may not have ever considered prosecuting someone for getting pregnant but he still can prosecute for Art 92 and Art 115. You get it yet? It's the state trooper tactic, "I'm not going to give you a ticket for wreckless driving so here's one for speeding".

My issue has been pretty clear. Court Marshalling (prosecuting) women for being pregnant is a stupid myopic policy which will never happen. The General involved said he hasn't considered that action, and hasn't taken that action. Nor has he permenantly effected the women under his command who have become pregnant either before or after he signed this policy.

His statement probably got him a little heat from the JAG but he is still fully within his rights as a commander to prosecute for the other infractions that goes along with getting knocked up in the war zone. Are you smelling the poop we're stepping in?

His rights have nothing to do with it. His justification has nothing to do with it. If that was the argument then the policy likely would have remained in effect and women would be court marshalled. That's not happenning, so clearly there is more going on here.

You don't know Commanding officers very well do you? Sure they might get smacked down publicly by your friends the "civilians". Fine, still doesn't mean he's going to endure looking like a punk to his troops. Once a Commander loses credibility amongst his troops he's sunk. You ever hear of **** rolls down hill? The **** will roll down hill, you can count on that. What you fail to realize is that the normal rules of society aren't the same as the rules in the military world. A commander has the luxury of setting policy and making up his own rules, again the military isn't a democracy.

If the general is smart, and I'm assuming his is. He won't touch this with a ten foot pole again. He made a mistake, now he's got to move on. If the press gets a whiff that he's secretly pursuing his agenda it will mean his job and his career.

Thanks for acknowledging that not only was I right but we're not going anywhere anytime soon either. We're still building up bases in Iraq but Joe American is so focused on the HC scam and Afghanistan they've forgotten all about Iraq. We live in a society infected with ADD when it comes to politics.

I forget what our original disagreement was. I think I said Obama would have us out of Iraq in 12-18 months after he was elected. Obama said we would be out of Iraq a year ago in 16 months. In beginning of December 10 months later Obama said we "may" be out of Iraq in 16 more months. And the military has said that's not a hard deadline.

I'm not with you that we will be there for decades as you've stated. Clearly you were right we aren't out yet, and it's not nearly as clear we will be getting out in the next two years.

[JMS]

So it sounds like it did hit the fan...

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/general-backs-off-threat-court-martial-pregnant-soldiers/story?id=9399604

Senators Demand General Rescind Order on Pregnant Soldiers

Four Democratic senators have written a letter to an Army general in Iraq asking him to rescind an order that threatened to court martial female soldiers who become pregnant while deployed in the war zone.

The policy by Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo III was instituted on Nov. 4, but it has triggered outrage among women's groups since it became publicly known in recent days.

"We can think of no greater deterrent to women contemplating a military career than the image of a pregnant woman being severely punished simply for conceiving a child," the senators wrote to Cucolo today. "This defies comprehension. As such, we urge you to immediately recind this policy."

The letter was signed by Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York.

It was the latest salvo to hit Cucolo over the controvesial policy. Earlier the National Organization for Women called the policy "ridiculous."

"How dare any government say we're going to impose any kind of punishment on women for getting pregnant," NOW President Terry O'Neill said. "This is not the 1800s."

O'Neill said NOW would turn to Defense Secretary Robert Gates and even President Obama for help.

[twa]

SIMPLY????

Friggin tools need to go back to screwing the interns and robbing us blind while the country goes to crap.

The letter was signed by Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York.

They wouldn't recognize personal responsibility or a good order if it bit em on the ass.

"Anyone who leaves this fight early because they made a personal choice that changed their medical status -- or contributes to doing that to another -- is not in keeping with a key element of our ethos, 'I will always place the mission first,' or three of our seven core values: loyalty, duty and selfless service," he continued. "And I believe there should be negative consequences for making that personal choice. "

OOORAH General :cool2:...I got ya back

[ZoEd]

JMS, what part of this do you not understand? The women are doing nothing wrong by being pregnant. They're disobeying a DIRECT order to not have sex while on combat duty. There is no way a woman can get pregnant without having intercourse, if you're forbidden from having intercourse then how the **** are you pregnant unless you disobeyed a direct order. Have I cleared this up, frontwards and backwards. Do these douchebag's in Washington not get this either? The general is not telling women they can't get pregnant, he's telling them they're not supposed to be having sex.

Riddle me this batman, where's the outrage about GO1 telling servicemen and women they can't have sex? The nerve of the gov't telling me I can't get my freak on in the AOR. How about posessing porn? What gives the gov't the right to tell me what I can and can't watch? These are all essential elements of GO1 that help maintain Good Order and Discipline.

Why no sex? Let me see if I can throw together a couple reasons real quick that would have an adverse affect on the mission.

1) Women can get pregnant and get sent home leaving a unit short handed and stressing another unit to backfill her position. Go figure.

2) Living qtr's are are typically occupied by several individuals so you're either having sex with others in the room, in public or some other place you shouldn't be having sex. Basically there's no place to be having sex "legally".

3) STD's, again impeding the mission due to medical reasons.

4) We have a hard enough time keeping people faithful while deployed and it's illegal, imagine if it wasn't. Jesus! People would be humping like rabbits.

5) In the AOR we work a lot more closely with officers than we typically do stateside. Imagine if the line were allowed to be blurred and sex was allowed. Fratenization would be running rampant.

You see JMS, these are just a handful of reasons while sex is prohibited which means getting knocked up is too. Does any of this make sense to you? Do you think the GO1 policy is going to change? Been this way since I deployed during the first Gulf War, what makes you think it's going to change now? So the General doesn't prosecute for getting prego, he can still prosecute for having sex. Gotcha Biatch!