Apparently dual military can now live together in Iraq. On a local forum, I posted I didn't agree with it. They pretty much said they fight for our freedom,let em do what they want. Wonder if they will get me a maid lol. I think its a liability.
Thoughts?

don't they both have to be in the military though :puzz??
i don't really agree with it. i mean it's not wrong or bad, but we're in a war. maybe if they were located someplace not hostile. it's hard enough worrying about your spouse back home, imagine if you were worried about him/her getting attacked in the same area as you are. i think it would distract people.

I think there should be guidelines for it like having to be married X amount of years
I see people who are dating other military people rushing to get married before they both deploy so that they can bunk together and have sex which could actually make divorce rates go up kwim?But to the people who are married because they truly love eachother i think it's awesome.Its hard enough making a marriage work while one is deployed let alone both of you.In the states they live together and sleep in the same bed why can't they while they're deployed?especially since from what hubby tells me their is NO PRIVACY in those rooms you can hear the guy next to you masturbating

Isn't it a liability if they're bunking seperately still?Your still worried about your SO no matter where they are

I'm absolutely FOR it. They're obviously both stationed in the same place, it can only make them happier and therefore they will have better attitudes and more positive energy overall. I don't see how that could be a negative thing at all.

I personally LOVE this new plan and feel it's been a long time coming!

Hopefully they get them GOOD birth control...

They better be handing out free vasectomies. Lefty is 200% right.

Hopefully they get them GOOD birth control...

:lmao

I think its a liability because the guy and girl will be worried about each other to concentrate on their task at hand. I don't know, it rubs me the wrong way.

I think its a liability because the guy and girl will be worried about each other to concentrate on their task at hand. I don't know, it rubs me the wrong way.

Won't they worry about eachother less since they get to see eachother every night?Before they had to bunk seperately on different sides and you didn't get to see eachother as much

I think its a liability because the guy and girl will be worried about each other to concentrate on their task at hand. I don't know, it rubs me the wrong way.

Think about that though: They are already BOTH deployed in the SAME place. That stands to reason that they will ALREADY be worried about eachother. Right? What does them living in the same little hut change about that situation? :puzz

I think its a liability because the guy and girl will be worried about each other to concentrate on their task at hand. I don't know, it rubs me the wrong way.

I think that would be the case if they were out on missions, but alot people are Fobbits, and never leave the wire...:shrug

I dont think they should be in the same place either.

I dont think they should be in the same place either.
thats sometimes not an option with both family members in the service

I don't really think it's fair :dunno

So they should be deployed to different places and worrying about eachother from x amnt of miles away instead of coming home to eachother? Really? Does distance really halt the worrying over your spouse's welfare? I must've fucked up then because I worry and we've got a lot of distance. :grin:

I don't really think it's fair :dunno

What's not fair?

I think it's a great idea.
That's all. Lol.

Ok maybe I'm a lil slow today I'm not seeing the connection of them being seperated and making them worry less?I would worry MORE

I'm off to the local recruiter's tomorrow.........sign me back the hell up!! I can serve my country and still maintain my marriage with less stress as a dual AD couple?? I mean c'mon...defend America, maybe even lose your life but you can't sleep with your dh/dw?? :screwy

Oh baby.....if THAT had been the case 22 years ago I would of stayed AD!!!

What's not fair?

To all the other servicemembers who don't have their spouses there.

I'm surprised the military would do something like that, seeing how they're so into "equality" and "fairness" and all that jazz.

It just seems like... a special privilege.

Then again, what do I know? :dunno

I think it's good if they let them live together. I saw a report on the news the other day that soldiers/military members who are able to come home every night to their family actually score higher on health exams, and basic awareness exams than those separated from family. They also said they have higher moral or something. Basically they are more aware and pay better attention to things, and they were less likely to have depression if they were living with their family. Those seem like things that would be very usueful in a war situation.

To all the other servicemembers who don't have their spouses there.

I'm surprised the military would do something like that, seeing how they're so into "equality" and "fairness" and all that jazz.

It just seems like... a special privilege.

Then again, what do I know? :dunno


All those other spouses have the option of joining the military so they can be so lucky and blessed to have this special privilege extended to them.

I'm absolutely FOR it. They're obviously both stationed in the same place, it can only make them happier and therefore they will have better attitudes and more positive energy overall. I don't see how that could be a negative thing at all.

I agree if they are both stationed together in Iraq they deserve to be able to share a home together.

All those other spouses have the option of joining the military so they can be so lucky and blessed to have this special privilege extended to them.

:rolleyes

Won't they worry about eachother less since they get to see eachother every night?Before they had to bunk seperately on different sides and you didn't get to see eachother as much
the difference is that the other spouse wouldn't necessarily be in a bad area, or deployed at all. and what if they have a family...should they start brining the kids along as well? what if the wife gets pregnate and something happens to her...what then?
i guess it's just too many "what ifs" for me. and we all know not every marriage is going to be perfect...add some combat in there :shock
who knows?
it's a cute idea but i don't find it practical.

I think that is awesome. why shouldnt they be allowed to bunk together? They are both AD,doing their jobs,deployed to the same place. Why should they have to give up they marital rights just because they are deployed?

I dont think they should be in the same place either.
yeah...:thinking isn't there a rule for navy spouses, they can't be on the same ship?

so should we change that too..
let them bunk together?

where does it end

what if the wife gets pregnate and something happens to her...what then?


Preggos get sent home...

(unrelated story) There was a preggers with DH in a different company. They told her that she had 24 hours to tell her husband back home, and she was shipped out within 2 days. Since she was still under orders, they sent her to Shithole Shelby to serve out the rest of her pregnancy/22 month deployment while they 15'd her for adultry..

the difference is that the other spouse wouldn't necessarily be in a bad area, or deployed at all. and what if they have a family...should they start brining the kids along as well? what if the wife gets pregnate and something happens to her...what then?
i guess it's just too many "what ifs" for me. and we all know not every marriage is going to be perfect...add some combat in there :shock
who knows?
it's a cute idea but i don't find it practical.They're are children with both parents deployed already,if theyre deployed in the same location then why can't they sleep together?If your pregnant you get sent home to the states

Preggos get sent home...

(unrelated story) There was a preggers with DH in a different company. They told her that she had 24 hours to tell her husband back home, and she was shipped out within 2 days. Since she was still under orders, they sent her to Shithole Shelby to serve out the rest of her pregnancy/22 month deployment while they 15'd her for adultry..

:wow

i bet that was a good conversation...

:wow

i bet that was a good conversation...


that's EXACTLY what DH said when he laughs about it... :rofl

H: Why are you coming home?
W: Ummmm, uh, because I miiissss you, and I looove you.

that's EXACTLY what DH said when he laughs about it... :rofl

H: Why are you coming home?
W: Ummmm, uh, because I miiissss you, and I looove you.

that would be like marcus calling me and being like "umm..honey.. i'm coming home.. and brining a surprise with me"..
:freakout

if you think that stuff is bad you should see what the girls at my work do :insomnia...
i thought i'd seen it all...:sigh

Preggos get sent home...

(unrelated story) There was a preggers with DH in a different company. They told her that she had 24 hours to tell her husband back home, and she was shipped out within 2 days. Since she was still under orders, they sent her to Shithole Shelby to serve out the rest of her pregnancy/22 month deployment while they 15'd her for adultry..


They can't "make" her tell her husband; they have no control over what conversation she has with her spouse. upon learning of the pregnancy, it's customary for the woman to be removed from a combat area/hostile fire area.

It is extremely unusual for any of the services to actually prosecute adultery under the UCMJ. The clause is there, but it's there as a secondary offense; that is, the primary offense might be something like disobeying a direct order or UA/AWOL or telling secrets or favoritism shown toward the junior member by the senior member, something like that. In order for the military to prosecute adultery, there has to be clear and compelling evidence that the act of adultery was detrimental to good order and discipline. Simply knockin' boots with someone else's spouse doesn't qualify. In addition, both of the adulterers are prosecuted, not just one.

Stories from around the water cooler sometimes take on a life of their own. In this case, I'd be curious to find out what punishment was meted out to the young stud who knocked her up, or was he just slapped on the back and told "good job!"

I'd be curious to find out what punishment was meted out to the young stud who knocked her up, or was he just slapped on the back and told "good job!"
:lmao omg thats fucked up but i find it soo funny

They can't "make" her tell her husband; they have no control over what conversation she has with her spouse. upon learning of the pregnancy, it's customary for the woman to be removed from a combat area/hostile fire area.

It is extremely unusual for any of the services to actually prosecute adultery under the UCMJ. The clause is there, but it's there as a secondary offense; that is, the primary offense might be something like disobeying a direct order or UA/AWOL or telling secrets or favoritism shown toward the junior member by the senior member, something like that. In order for the military to prosecute adultery, there has to be clear and compelling evidence that the act of adultery was detrimental to good order and discipline. Simply knockin' boots with someone else's spouse doesn't qualify. In addition, both of the adulterers are prosecuted, not just one.

Stories from around the water cooler sometimes take on a life of their own. In this case, I'd be curious to find out what punishment was meted out to the young stud who knocked her up, or was he just slapped on the back and told "good job!"

Unfortunately that is not true. Been through it already personally, and watch others go down for the same thing.

I think they can tell her to tell her husband. They own her. I know someone who was forced to change banks because of money mismangement. Shelby's not THAT bad..they need a daycare so I can get a real job though lol.

:lmao omg thats fucked up but i find it soo funny

Well, ya know.... he's the stud, right? Kickin it with the babe? Isn't that what real men do? (gag)

Seriously- that's something that's changed drastically since I joine dthe navy back in the Dark Ages (1977). Back then, it was ALL on the woman, that dirty little slut! If she didn't have those breasteses all stickin' out of her chest, and that sweet voice, and that tight little touckas holdin up them Seafarers (which were about the un-sexiest kind of pants you could imagine), then he wouldn't have come undone!

You laugh....... it's only funny NOW, 30 years on. ;-)

They can't "make" her tell her husband; they have no control over what conversation she has with her spouse. upon learning of the pregnancy, it's customary for the woman to be removed from a combat area/hostile fire area.

It is extremely unusual for any of the services to actually prosecute adultery under the UCMJ. The clause is there, but it's there as a secondary offense; that is, the primary offense might be something like disobeying a direct order or UA/AWOL or telling secrets or favoritism shown toward the junior member by the senior member, something like that. In order for the military to prosecute adultery, there has to be clear and compelling evidence that the act of adultery was detrimental to good order and discipline. Simply knockin' boots with someone else's spouse doesn't qualify. In addition, both of the adulterers are prosecuted, not just one.

Stories from around the water cooler sometimes take on a life of their own. In this case, I'd be curious to find out what punishment was meted out to the young stud who knocked her up, or was he just slapped on the back and told "good job!"

HE was single, he didn't do anything wrong. They gave HER 24 hours to tell him, or command would do it FOR her.

I think a married female winding up pregnant 7 months into a deployment after a 6 month train up is pretty good evidence of adultry.

Well, ya know.... he's the stud, right? Kickin it with the babe? Isn't that what real men do? (gag)

Seriously- that's something that's changed drastically since I joine dthe navy back in the Dark Ages (1977). Back then, it was ALL on the woman, that dirty little slut! If she didn't have those breasteses all stickin' out of her chest, and that sweet voice, and that tight little touckas holdin up them Seafarers (which were about the un-sexiest kind of pants you could imagine), then he wouldn't have come undone!

You laugh....... it's only funny NOW, 30 years on. ;-)

:lmao That is still the attitude towards a pregnant female trust me LOLZ. (shit it is the attitude towards just a regular female in many cases too, when a military man cheats it is ALL that darn boat ho's fault she must of seduced him with her female wiles. :rolleyes)

Unfortunately that is not true. Been through it already personally, and watch others go down for the same thing.

Really? You were present at the Captain's Masts and the Courts-Martial?

I say again: it is extremely rare for a military member to be prosecuted for adultery alone; it is not considered a primary offense. The reason these people "went down" would have been because their adultery was determined to be detrimental to good order and discipline, and it affected the entire command/unit/organization. For example, a superior boning the wife of a subordinate, and the superior deliberately scheduling the subordinate to work specific hours so the superior could hook up with the spouse. Once again, the primary offense here is not adultery, it's abuse of power (which will take down an officer faster than you can say lickety-split).

Rumor control can be fun, but it can also be a very dangerous thing. I'm very sorry for your personal situation; that must have sucked, and I'm sorry you had to endure what nobody should have to. But again- the primary offense would have been something different, and adultery would have been an add-on.

HE was single, he didn't do anything wrong. They gave HER 24 hours to tell him, or command would do it FOR her.

I think a married female winding up pregnant 7 months into a deployment after a 6 month train up is pretty good evidence of adultry.

He too was committing adultery he was sleeping with a married woman. He should have been punished as well CONSIDERING just the act of having sex was against the UCMJ. It is no different then two shipmates knocking boots while the ship is underway. He broke da rulz and should of been 15nd right along with her.

I say again: it is extremely rare for a military member to be prosecuted for adultery alone; it is not considered a primary offense.

:wavey Our neighbor was!!!

HE was single, he didn't do anything wrong. They gave HER 24 hours to tell him, or command would do it FOR her.

I think a married female winding up pregnant 7 months into a deployment after a 6 month train up is pretty good evidence of adultry.

Again- she was given the choice to tell. I don't think the command would tell, because that would be a violation of both HIPAA and the Privacy Act of 1974. commanders know this, and they know it very well. they may have threatened her with that, and they may have liked it that the rest of the command believed they were going to do that, but they can't. It's against the law.

And while a pregnancy is very good evidence of adultery, it's NOT evidence of the other offenses that would be the primary charge at a Mast/hearing. Adultery in and of itself is very, very rarely prosecuted as a primary offense. There would have had to be something different, and adultery was the add-on.

Well, ya know.... he's the stud, right? Kickin it with the babe? Isn't that what real men do? (gag)

Seriously- that's something that's changed drastically since I joine dthe navy back in the Dark Ages (1977). Back then, it was ALL on the woman, that dirty little slut! If she didn't have those breasteses all stickin' out of her chest, and that sweet voice, and that tight little touckas holdin up them Seafarers (which were about the un-sexiest kind of pants you could imagine), then he wouldn't have come undone!

You laugh....... it's only funny NOW, 30 years on. ;-)

:hystericlaugh i just pictured someone saying that in like a lil witch voice

All those other spouses have the option of joining the military so they can be so lucky and blessed to have this special privilege extended to them.

I have to agree with this one.

I'm absolutely FOR it. They're obviously both stationed in the same place, it can only make them happier and therefore they will have better attitudes and more positive energy overall. I don't see how that could be a negative thing at all.

I second that!

Again- she was given the choice to tell. I don't think the command would tell, because that would be a violation of both HIPAA and the Privacy Act of 1974. commanders know this, and they know it very well. they may have threatened her with that, and they may have liked it that the rest of the command believed they were going to do that, but they can't. It's against the law.

And while a pregnancy is very good evidence of adultery, it's NOT evidence of the other offenses that would be the primary charge at a Mast/hearing. Adultery in and of itself is very, very rarely prosecuted as a primary offense. There would have had to be something different, and adultery was the add-on.

:yes such as having sex while deployed. For example person A is married sleeps with person B on the ship while the ship is underway get caught in the act. The first crime is the knocking boots while underway, the adultery is the second charge. I am sure my DH can explain it a lot better with the exact regs and what ones were broken but that is it in a nutshell.

HE was single, he didn't do anything wrong. They gave HER 24 hours to tell him, or command would do it FOR her.

I think a married female winding up pregnant 7 months into a deployment after a 6 month train up is pretty good evidence of adultry.
actually if one commits adultery the other military person gets charged too if it is proven that they knew the other was married (and probably sometimes if they didnt know)

Really? You were present at the Captain's Masts and the Courts-Martial?

I say again: it is extremely rare for a military member to be prosecuted for adultery alone; it is not considered a primary offense. The reason these people "went down" would have been because their adultery was determined to be detrimental to good order and discipline, and it affected the entire command/unit/organization. For example, a superior boning the wife of a subordinate, and the superior deliberately scheduling the subordinate to work specific hours so the superior could hook up with the spouse. Once again, the primary offense here is not adultery, it's abuse of power (which will take down an officer faster than you can say lickety-split).

Rumor control can be fun, but it can also be a very dangerous thing. I'm very sorry for your personal situation; that must have sucked, and I'm sorry you had to endure what nobody should have to. But again- the primary offense would have been something different, and adultery would have been an add-on.

No I wasn't allowed to be there, but it was my DH that was sent to captain's mast for it. we were separated and I was half way across the the country. I just hadn't had a chance to file yet. He was busted down from E5 to E4 & took both his pins (which he got back on appeal). It was her husband that turned them in and her only punishment was that she couldn't wear her frock till she got paid for it (2 weeks later).

It had nothing to do with anything really. He wasn't in charge of her for ANYTHING. The original email was set up to look like it was from me. We had just come out of some hard medical stuff with our son, and the command nailed him because of what they "thought" was going on. I was personally told after the fact, that if they had known that it wasn't me that sent the email, he just would have been counseled on it.

I agree with it.

yeah...:thinking isn't there a rule for navy spouses, they can't be on the same ship?

so should we change that too..
let them bunk together?

where does it end

I don't see why not, do you? I think the only problem anyone would have with this policy change is jealousy. Honestly. I have to admit I'm a little jealous, but at the same time I'm really happy for those who get to benefit from this. :shrug

:yes such as having sex while deployed. For example person A is married sleeps with person B on the ship while the ship is underway get caught in the act. The first crime is the knocking boots while underway, the adultery is the second charge. I am sure my DH can explain it a lot better with the exact regs and what ones were broken but that is it in a nutshell.

Exactly. The primary charge is Disobeying a Direct Lawful Order. Two unmarried people who kick it while underway would likely be charged with the same offense(s), with the exception that no adultery took place.

Frankly, the military rarely cares if people are committing adultery; that's a private (sometimes civil) matter. It's only a big deal if the adulterers are doing something else seriously wrong, like spending the MWR money on a vacation in Tahiti. ;-)

I don't see why not, do you? I think the only problem anyone would have with this policy change is jealousy. Honestly. I have to admit I'm a little jealous, but at the same time I'm really happy for those who get to benefit from this. :shrug
ITA!!!

Here is another example person A. and Person B. both single got busted making out underway. Person A. junior female got busted down in rank, half pay times two, and restriction with extra duty. Person B. third class petty officer but suspended bust. See how that works not exactly what one would call justice right?

Person A was a squared away sailor never in trouble a day in her life Person B was sort of a shit bag. So Donna it doesn't always work out that the female gets away with no punishment it can go either way. Depends on the politics of the situation as well in my example person A was on a crew swap and was sent back to her command. Her punishment had more to do with the command being embarressed then the actual offense.

As for peeps that get CAUGHT having sex or making out they are not doing anything that MANY others are not also doing they just had bad luck and were caught.

:lmao That is still the attitude towards a pregnant female trust me LOLZ. (shit it is the attitude towards just a regular female in many cases too, when a military man cheats it is ALL that darn boat ho's fault she must of seduced him with her female wiles. :rolleyes)


:lmao Yep, women love to blame the boat ho, but never the man.

No I wasn't allowed to be there, but it was my DH that was sent to captain's mast for it. we were separated and I was half way across the the country. I just hadn't had a chance to file yet. He was busted down from E5 to E4 & took both his pins (which he got back on appeal). It was her husband that turned them in and her only punishment was that she couldn't wear her frock till she got paid for it (2 weeks later).

It had nothing to do with anything really. He wasn't in charge of her for ANYTHING. The original email was set up to look like it was from me. We had just come out of some hard medical stuff with our son, and the command nailed him because of what they "thought" was going on. I was personally told after the fact, that if they had known that it wasn't me that sent the email, he just would have been counseled on it.


I'm sorry that happened to you Donna, that's really messed up, and I'm glad you've been able to get past that part of your life.

Yours may indeed be one of the very, ver few cases of adultery that get prosecuted (really, the number is miniscule). Did you happen to see the charge sheet?

:lmao Yep, women love to blame the boat ho, but never the man.

That's because for a man, being a 'ho' is a good thing.
:screwy

I'm sorry that happened to you Donna, that's really messed up, and I'm glad you've been able to get past that part of your life.

Yours may indeed be one of the very, ver few cases of adultery that get prosecuted (really, the number is miniscule). Did you happen to see the charge sheet?

yup. have a copy of it DH's military file here at home. The ONLY charge listed is adultery.

With hindsight being 20/20, he should have asked for a court martial. It would have been dropped right then and there. At least from what legal says, because that was the only charge.

It's been rough, but he has his E5 back now and we just found out that that didnt effect his ability to pull retirement. (We were worried about HYT and what not with him hitting 14 years this year). He got the EP for his command on this years eval, so I am hoping that it means he will be able to take the E6 exam in march a year early.

That's because for a man, being a 'ho' is a good thing.
:screwy

Yeah except for often the girl is often not a ho just believed some story the man told her. I have heard so many lines. It is really sad. I see what happens to the new girls too, it is like chum in the water the men practically taking polls to who will hook up with her first. For some of the girls they came from sheltered homes and are not used to all of the attention and they don't know that the "men" are not sincere. it is sick and twisted. There are very few single sailors that act like decent human beings.

yup. have a copy of it DH's military file here at home. The ONLY charge listed is adultery.

With hindsight being 20/20, he should have asked for a court martial. It would have been dropped right then and there. At least from what legal says, because that was the only charge.

It's been rough, but he has his E5 back now and we just found out that that didnt effect his ability to pull retirement. (We were worried about HYT and what not with him hitting 14 years this year). He got the EP for his command on this years eval, so I am hoping that it means he will be able to take the E6 exam in march a year early.

(((HUGS))) It is MUCH easier to recover from a mast when you are an E2 then it is to recover as a higher ranking enlisted. I hope he makes E6 and your families luck begins to turn around.

I am all for it. I agree with the statement they fight for us so let them be. They are seperated from their kids so let them at least be together as husband and wife.

yup. have a copy of it DH's military file here at home. The ONLY charge listed is adultery.

With hindsight being 20/20, he should have asked for a court martial. It would have been dropped right then and there. At least from what legal says, because that was the only charge.

It's been rough, but he has his E5 back now and we just found out that that didnt effect his ability to pull retirement. (We were worried about HYT and what not with him hitting 14 years this year). He got the EP for his command on this years eval, so I am hoping that it means he will be able to take the E6 exam in march a year early.

Well Donna, that makes you a truly Rare Bird. ;-)

Glad you're both recovering from this. It's trite, but what doesn't kill ya does indeed make you stronger.

Not to mention; Sex is a great stress-reliever and can help depression. Better that the married couple be able to be together and get some :sex than they should get all crazy depressed and need thousands of dollars worth of counseling right? :D

I dont know. DB's sister and her hubby will get to do that. and i think it will be kind of a distraction for them and the people around them. I mean... I cant stand seeing couples all kissy faced around me when DB is gone.

if the married couples get to bunk together, then everyone who had to leave their wives/gf's at home will have to deal with seeing these couples every day!

Besides.... being in the military is their JOB, i don't approve of people 'getting down' :sex on any job! so why should this be any different? I think it might just end up being a MAJOR distraction. and it's not like they're not going to find a way to have sex anyway... they dont need to sleep together to do it... we all know that!

but it is what it is. so i agree on pumping those girls full of good BC

They can't "make" her tell her husband; they have no control over what conversation she has with her spouse. upon learning of the pregnancy, it's customary for the woman to be removed from a combat area/hostile fire area.

It is extremely unusual for any of the services to actually prosecute adultery under the UCMJ. The clause is there, but it's there as a secondary offense; that is, the primary offense might be something like disobeying a direct order or UA/AWOL or telling secrets or favoritism shown toward the junior member by the senior member, something like that. In order for the military to prosecute adultery, there has to be clear and compelling evidence that the act of adultery was detrimental to good order and discipline. Simply knockin' boots with someone else's spouse doesn't qualify. In addition, both of the adulterers are prosecuted, not just one.

Stories from around the water cooler sometimes take on a life of their own. In this case, I'd be curious to find out what punishment was meted out to the young stud who knocked her up, or was he just slapped on the back and told "good job!"

Two birds with one stone here . . . A girl (and I don't care that she was over 18 she was still a girl) in DB's unit lived with her husband on their deployment and, shock and surprise, she got pregnant. She got sent home and is no longer in the military because of punishment- getting pregnant while in a war zone is deff. a bad thing because you are loosing a soldier. No matter if it is adultery or not. I think it is great that they get to live together- after all they do deserve special priveledge for both being AD- but they should also be held responsible to their job & mission first. JMO

Two birds with one stone here . . . A girl (and I don't care that she was over 18 she was still a girl) in DB's unit lived with her husband on their deployment and, shock and surprise, she got pregnant. She got sent home and is no longer in the military because of punishment- getting pregnant while in a war zone is deff. a bad thing because you are loosing a soldier. No matter if it is adultery or not. I think it is great that they get to live together- after all they do deserve special priveledge for both being AD- but they should also be held responsible to their job & mission first. JMO

Oh, I absolutely agree.... and as soon as they start going after the guys who blow out their ACLs while playing intramural sports and get sent TAD to shore duty, or the ones who get drunk and get in car accidents and need 6 weeks of hospitalization and rehab, or the morons who fail to use proper back support while doing heavy lifting on the job and end up on light duty x 6 months..... yeah, as long as they're going after all of those, they should go after women who end up pregnant.

Not all pregnancies are planned, whether the woman is in a war zone or not. Not all women who get pregnant in a war zone did so for the purpose of leaving the area. Remember your biiology- if SHE was screwing, then there was at least one other person involved. If they go after her, they should go after him, too. After all, he is equally responsible for the loss of this soldier/sailor, is he not?

Edited to add: She didn't get tossed from the military because she ended up pregnant; they aren't going to 'punish' her for that. There was something else involved in order for it to be disciplinary.

I dont know. DB's sister and her hubby will get to do that. and i think it will be kind of a distraction for them and the people around them. I mean... I cant stand seeing couples all kissy faced around me when DB is gone.

if the married couples get to bunk together, then everyone who had to leave their wives/gf's at home will have to deal with seeing these couples every day!

Besides.... being in the military is their JOB, i don't approve of people 'getting down' :sex on any job! so why should this be any different? I think it might just end up being a MAJOR distraction. and it's not like they're not going to find a way to have sex anyway... they dont need to sleep together to do it... we all know that!

but it is what it is. so i agree on pumping those girls full of good BC
There is no PDA allowed when in uniform so no one is going to see them holding hands, kissing or anything like that. So you would rather they are breaking the UCMJ by having sex in secret places then to do it in the appropriate place with the commands sanction?

Oh, I absolutely agree.... and as soon as they start going after the guys who blow out their ACLs while playing intramural sports and get sent TAD to shore duty, or the ones who get drunk and get in car accidents and need 6 weeks of hospitalization and rehab, or the morons who fail to use proper back support while doing heavy lifting on the job and end up on light duty x 6 months..... yeah, as long as they're going after all of those, they should go after women who end up pregnant.

Not all pregnancies are planned, whether the woman is in a war zone or not. Not all women who get pregnant in a war zone did so for the purpose of leaving the area. Remember your biiology- if SHE was screwing, then there was at least one other person involved. If they go after her, they should go after him, too. After all, he is equally responsible for the loss of this soldier/sailor, is he not?

Edited to add: She didn't get tossed from the military because she ended up pregnant; they aren't going to 'punish' her for that. There was something else involved in order for it to be disciplinary.

I agree.

Two birds with one stone here . . . A girl (and I don't care that she was over 18 she was still a girl) in DB's unit lived with her husband on their deployment and, shock and surprise, she got pregnant. She got sent home and is no longer in the military because of punishment- getting pregnant while in a war zone is deff. a bad thing because you are loosing a soldier. No matter if it is adultery or not. I think it is great that they get to live together- after all they do deserve special priveledge for both being AD- but they should also be held responsible to their job & mission first. JMO

Oh yeah. Getting pregnant may be one of the fastest ways to get sent home, but it is also one of the fastest ways that these married couples will ensure that they don't see each other every night anymore, too.

I don't have a problem with it, personally. I can definitely see how it would actually help a soldier deal with the deployment better than they would if they were there by themselves. I wouldn't be willing to join up just to sleep in the same bed with Adam if that bed was in Iraq or anything, but I don't see anything wrong with letting people who are already in that situation do it. It does seem like a baby step towards Iraq being a duty station instead of a deployment though. I just hope that our government is smart enough to not make that leap until the area is actually safe enough. Which will probably never happen.

Yeah except for often the girl is often not a ho just believed some story the man told her. I have heard so many lines. It is really sad. I see what happens to the new girls too, it is like chum in the water the men practically taking polls to who will hook up with her first. For some of the girls they came from sheltered homes and are not used to all of the attention and they don't know that the "men" are not sincere. it is sick and twisted. There are very few single sailors that act like decent human beings.

Not all Sailors are that way......Some of us are actually decent.....

I don't see a problem with it at all. I think its great that married military couples can live together now matter what their call of duty is for whatever particular length of time.

I think its great that married couples are able to live together in a war zone.

Not all Sailors are that way......Some of us are actually decent.....

Note I said SINGLE sailors and very few which implies there are indeed a few good ones out there. Don't take everything I say as something against yourself.

I admit I'm a little jealous that I can't be with my DH, but I do think it is a good idea if they work out all the kinks. I know right now they don't have enough space for all military couples to live together so I think that would be really hard to decide which couples get to live together and which have to stay separated and especially hard for the couples that know they got passed up. Also, I do think it would be hard for those who's SO's aren't in the military because even though PDA is not allowed in uniform or on the job just thinking about how lucky they are to have that comfort will probably hurt. I don't know I guess I see the benefits and the downfalls of it......I just think it needs a little more work to be truly effective.

Until Iraq is no longer a combat zone, I disagree with it.

My DH said while he was over there one of the commanders were talking about this. The commander (sp?) said that he thinks it is a good idea because they are in the same place and why should they not. However if the woman were to get pregnant then there should be repurcussions (sp?) such as an article 15. I think that it's a good idea. They are in the same place and married so I don't see why it isn't fair. My husband obviosly didn't have me there but yet he thought it was. If I wanted this privelage then I would join the military as well. But I am not and I think its awesome they do this.

I think its a liability because the guy and girl will be worried about each other to concentrate on their task at hand. I don't know, it rubs me the wrong way.

:yes

I had a chance to talk to DH

I was surprised that most of the guys are against it.
The reasons?

Arguments, fights, domestic violence in a high stress area, etc

I didn't even think of that.

I had a chance to talk to DH

I was surprised that most of the guys are against it.
The reasons?

Arguments, fights, domestic violence in a high stress area, etc

I didn't even think of that.

I had thought about that, but at the same time think of it this way:

How many of us here have had stupid little fights over the phone, email, IM, or even through letters with our SO's? Should we cut off those forms of communication simply because our piddly arguments cause stress?

As far as the domestic violence goes; I know a few female soldiers and I would love to see a guy try to abuse them. :lmao

So they should be deployed to different places and worrying about eachother from x amnt of miles away instead of coming home to eachother? Really? Does distance really halt the worrying over your spouse's welfare? I must've fucked up then because I worry and we've got a lot of distance. :grin:

ITA

I was going to leave this alone... It is common sense if they are in the same place deployed or whatever to live together... duh?