To be fair, unless I’m mistake or the rules have changed, those in the military can drink.

I had a friend who joined right after high school who was able to buy beer, at least on the base. Not sure if that worked anywhere else.

No. It used to be that military bases in southern California would allow all those 18 and over to drink, in order to discourage them from going across the border into Tijuana and getting themselves in trouble. This ended in March or April of 1996 under the Klintoon Administration (by order of his SecDef). I remember this clearly, as at the time I was at School of Infantry in Camp Pendleton. The last Friday night before the ban was an absolute zoo at the E Club.

5 combat tours here. Get with the program

ted c on July 14, 2009 at 5:03 PM

People smoke, get with the program.

21 years and you never touched ground in combat? You brave, brave individual, all that time banging chicks in the barracks and getting tore up on the weekends must have sucked. I have 5 years in uniform, and DID see combat – many times. I smoked all 5 years of that (minus the 9 weeks in basic. I snuck out of the barracks to go smoke in the treeline in AIT). I never failed a single PT test. In fact, I never got below a 300 on ANY PT test, to include post-injury recovery PT tests. Nor did any soldier that smoked that was underneath me.

You see, sweetheart garrison commando, I’m everything that you never could be.

What I did conclude is that soldiers are less likely to obey orders when command placed unnecessary restrictions upon the soldiers that contributed absolutely nothing to team unity or good order and discipline.

It doesn’t make much sense to tell someone that they can’t do something that has the possibility to kill them, when you send them out to do a job that has the possibility to kill them.

leetpriest on July 14, 2009 at 4:50 PM

5 combat tours here. Get with the program

Look, Master Chief. With all due respect–I’ve got 21 years in uniform. Jumped from planes and helped fight the war–from the shore–not the ship–so backup. I know your type, you know everything, just ask ya right.

pound sand–you probably retired once your fat hands couldn’t find a pair of khakis that fit.

ted c on July 14, 2009 at 1:21 PM

21 years and you never touched ground in combat? You brave, brave individual, all that time banging chicks in the barracks and getting tore up on the weekends must have sucked. I have 5 years in uniform, and DID see combat – many times. I smoked all 5 years of that (minus the 9 weeks in basic. I snuck out of the barracks to go smoke in the treeline in AIT). I never failed a single PT test. In fact, I never got below a 300 on ANY PT test, to include post-injury recovery PT tests. Nor did any soldier that smoked that was underneath me.

You see, sweetheart garrison commando, I’m everything that you never could be.

What I did conclude is that soldiers are less likely to obey orders when command placed unnecessary restrictions upon the soldiers that contributed absolutely nothing to team unity or good order and discipline.

It doesn’t make much sense to tell someone that they can’t do something that has the possibility to kill them, when you send them out to do a job that has the possibility to kill them.

We have the BEST military in the world – let’s not let a few who have never served in uniform muck it up – even if they “claim” to be Conservatives.

HondaV65 on July 13, 2009 at 5:33 PM

Look, Master Chief. With all due respect–I’ve got 21 years in uniform. Jumped from planes and helped fight the war–from the shore–not the ship–so backup. I know your type, you know everything, just ask ya right.

pound sand–you probably retired once your fat hands couldn’t find a pair of khakis that fit.

Interestingly, you don’t have to fill out any of these forms before going out on a convoy in Iraq….

Risky and unhealthy behavior ought to beget higher premiums, particularly for preventable conditions like tobacco use. Moreover, safe drivers get lower premiums. Many of the top diseases are preventable and when people begin to take aggressive and healthy steps toward actually doing that, then their health care rates should be lowered as their risk is lowered.

ted c on July 12, 2009 at 7:10 PM

You … really don’t want to live in that world.

Who defines “risky” behavior??

1. Perhaps if you’re a member of the NRA you should be charged higher health premiums because you shoot firearms occasionally and that carries some “risk”.

2. Perhaps if you’re a hunter … you should be charged too? Hunters sometimes get shot accidentally.

3. What if you drive 100 miles to work everyday? Aren’t you more likely to have an accident than your neighbor that lives only 5 miles from his work?

4. What if you’re a businessman – and commute often on airlines? Hey – you have a higher risk of getting killed in a crash.

5. Certainly, if you enjoy … Scuba Diving, Surfing, Wind Surfing, Sky Diving, Hang Gliding, and other sports … like SOFTBALL – these are hazardous sports – you should be charged more. Yeah – I just added softball because command softball games are a major source of injury in the armed forces – I know this, because I’m a retired Master Chief. Something about old men and beer, and sliding around and trying to catch balls that makes this a very hazardous proposition.

Yeah – let’s go down this road people.

Or … how about not …

And just let the GI’s make their own decisions about THEIR health. The military already has semi-annual (or more often) physical readiness tests. These tests are supposed to demonstrate the minimum acceptable level of fitness required by a Soldier, Sailor, Airman, or Marine. When the military wants the standards raised – they raise them. If you can meet the standards – even if you smoke – then good for you. Most servicemembers know when it’s time to quit. When I was Navy – I smoked until it became painful for me to pass these tests – then I quit – problem solved. If you don’t pass the tests – you get kicked out.

We have the BEST military in the world – let’s not let a few who have never served in uniform muck it up – even if they “claim” to be Conservatives.

Cigarettes, Lucky Strikes I believe, used to be part of the rations in World War II. All soldiers smoked in WWII. How the hell did they beat the Nazis?

Special K on July 13, 2009 at 1:56 PM

Forget that America, todays America lacks testosterone.

Lets start with the Commander In Chief. (or is that the TOTUS?)

bbordwell on July 13, 2009 at 12:43 PM

Ummm. that would be “leadership by example…”

that’s not in the statist liberal lexicon.

The current party line is, “Do as I say, not as I do”
didn’t you get the memo?

back to reeducation camp with you!

Jeff from WI on July 13, 2009 at 9:40 AM

I can go to MacDonald’s anytime I want, and eat there as often as I want…and a mother can basically do the same with their children.
If you think regulating cigarettes is the same, you are just trying to start a stupid argument.
Autos contribute more to death of people under 30 then cigarettes…ban cars?

right2bright on July 13, 2009 at 10:01 AM

If you think the coming Obama Care isn’t out to regulate EVERY part of your life, including penalties for smoking, ideal weight and % of fat to body mass, you’re kidding yourself. What a person can eat WILL be regulated. It’s only time.

I believe that is being done as we speak.

Jeff from WI on July 13, 2009 at 9:40 AM

I can go to MacDonald’s anytime I want, and eat there as often as I want…and a mother can basically do the same with their children.
If you think regulating cigarettes is the same, you are just trying to start a stupid argument.
Autos contribute more to death of people under 30 then cigarettes…ban cars?

What anti-smoking NAZIS always say is you’ll lose 10 years of your life if you smoke.What they don’t tell you is that it’s the worst 10 years. Sitting alone in a dirty diaper in a nursing home, waiting to die.

Jeff from WI on July 13, 2009 at 7:08 AM

Same with overweight people, probably a larger killer. So we should regulate what is eaten?

right2bright on July 13, 2009 at 9:38 AM

I believe that is being done as we speak.

What anti-smoking NAZIS always say is you’ll lose 10 years of your life if you smoke.What they don’t tell you is that it’s the worst 10 years. Sitting alone in a dirty diaper in a nursing home, waiting to die.

Jeff from WI on July 13, 2009 at 7:08 AM

Same with overweight people, probably a larger killer. So we should regulate what is eaten?

but you can`t walk in a bar and have a beer unless your Mama hands it to you. The inmates are running the Asylum.

LSUMama on July 13, 2009 at 8:11 AM

Because 18′s hang out with 16′s, so you end up with underage drinking…however, 18′s can recommend a 16 year old to join and fight along with them…they will be refused.
Expand your thinking…

LSUMama on July 13, 2009 at 8:11 AM

Yeah, we shouldn’t have an age requirement for alcohol.

Now, the DoD will never make active duty military subsidize their health care. If that happened, a few things would result that the DoD doesn’t want. 1) the smokers would complain that those who drink alcohol and/or eat crappy, fatty foods don’t have to pay for some of their health care (many of us know smokers who do well or even ace the PT test…and that would be one of the smokers’ complaints). 2) Smokers having to pay for some of their health care costs would snowball to the active duty getting to choose their health care provider…and I don’t know many guys who would choose their base military hobby shop as their health care provider.

It is already within the commander’s purview to limit or eliminate smoke breaks during duty hours. If you or anyone have any complaints about too many smoke breaks, that’s easy to deal with.

Again, the taxpayer isn’t subsidizing the smokes. The military pays the federal tax on smokes, gas, alcohol. Their have already been suits against the military for not charging sales tax at BXs and PXs and that suit went nowhere. BECAUSE with Walmarts and Targets and smart shopping, any military member can find better deals off-base (or online…and I don’t pay tax when I buy from amazon!)

Look, we already subsidize our own health care in two ways: 1) fewer and fewer health care providers (like you!) even take the crappy Tricare HMO that we have (and I thank you for taking it…seriously), so when we have to search high and low for an off-base provider to care for our kids and spouses (because on base “hospitals” are pretty much a thing of the past), have to deal with driving to this doctor WHEN we can get an appointment…we’re subsidizing our own healthcare and that of our dependents; 2) we don’t get free lifetime healthcare anymore when we retire, so we ARE subsidizing our own healthcare.