Can’t ban it outright, too many tax dollars.

So tobacco continues to grease the grimy hands of government. Govt will beat up on ‘big tobacco’ when it’s politically expedient but wouldn’t actually put their money where their mouth is and ban it outright.

amen Mr. Dad.

An axiom in leadership is to never send subordinates on a mission you would not undertake yourself.

Thanks for the reminder.

…”subsidies” said the same thing — Obama should set the example (see USAT article, linked in my post above).

I’m okay with smoking being banned outright inside public buildings (private institutions are something else). This, though, ain’t that.

In my experience tobacco use is much higher than 30 percent in the Infantry and other ground MOS’s. Even in the Reserves you will see many who smoke/dip/chew/puff on cigars etc only on drill and not in civilian life. Whoever proposed this policy knows nothing about military culture or actually wants to further weaken morale and retention goals.

I actualy served in the Navy from ‘94 to ‘99 and smoked at the time. I can tell you that there was only one type of service vessel that allowed smoking in-doors and that wa a submarine.
Smoking was relegated to the outside. If on a base it was in a designated area near buildings. On a ship it was in designated to areas on deck.
most spaces onboard a ship don’t have delicate electronics in them and the ones that do have electronics are hardened to withstand much sterner stuff that tobacco smoke.

Now for a smart remark about the proposed ban.
Has congress done a study on the cost that bullets, bombs, PSD, and exposeure to loud noise, radar radiation and all manner of toxic crap that you handle everyday. Lets worry about the immediate first.

Who really wants to be the guy that tell a freshly wounded man “Sorry! You can’t light that or I’ll have to report you.”

It’s never really been encouraged since Vietnam, except maybe through peer pressure. However, making something illegal for our volunteer troops while keeping it legal for the general populace is patently unfair.

“But you still should not be glorifying it here. Children may be reading.”

I wish.

Who here is glorifying tobacco use? How are you paying for it through your tax dollars? If you mean you are paying in health costs, then why not stop soldiers from eating hamburgers or drinking coke? You are paying for their poor health from bullets too. Do you think those who are the best of us, those who raise their right hand, should have fewer rights than we do? Do you think civilians who can go out and party all night should be telling our soldiers in the field they can’t even smoke a cig in during down time?

You mention that they will give their position away to the enemy, do you think you know more about this than they do?

Let me let you in on a secret. We are not glorifying or even really talking about tobacco. We are talking about freedom and a man’s right to be a free man. Our troops already give up so many rights when they raise their right hand. They give up the right to not charge a hill when commanded to do so. They give up the right to quit just because their boss is a jerk or because they are just tired of 120 degree heat. And you stand on your high horse saying they can’t have a dip because it costs YOU money?

I think you and a few others need to get off your pet personal issues and start thinking about what it means to support freedom. Any lefty jerk can support freedoms he happens to agree with. A person that truly supports freedom vehemently supports the right of others to do legal things they personally abhor, get it?

and this becomes a really funny post.

YOU never made me do push ups or run for miles. I LOVED every bit of it and lamented when my primary duties conflicted with my ability to get a work out in.

I smoke it’s legal and I am sick to death of those like yourself who are high and mighty and want the government to regulate something you yourself are not particulary fond of….how about you obese pigs outs there? want the government telling you what to eat? MORE people die from coronary heart disease related to fatty foods than cigarettes…..how about you DRUNKS out there? more people die from alcohol related diseases than cigarettes including mass murder when you drunks decide to drink and drive…I look forward to the day that the government AGAIN comes for your alcohol.

Just because you don’t personally like cigarette’s does not give you the MORAL authority NOR the government the MORAL authority to DECIDE what is acceptable for ME a FREE American to do and how to do it NOR when or where to do it. I am sick to death of the people putting their high and mighty noses into my PERSONAL decisions and thinking their life decisions are off limit to the government. My cigarette’s may one day be illegal but one day something you treasure as a FREE American will be gone and then you will be whining about that and I will sit and laugh at you!

Whoever has his enemy at his mercy &
does not destroy him is his own enemy

saving the taxpayer ten years of social security payments.

I don’t smoke. And I really don’t like the stench of second-hand smoke.

But what I hate micro-managing even more. The Armed Forces have standards of performance. As long as soldiers meet them, I’m not inclined to nit-pick.

With all due apologies to the three kids that read this.

….going places bullets are flying, and being shot?

So by your argument tobacco use costs you money through higher healthcare bills…interesting. I wonder how much it will cost the tax payer when the sample size is applied to the entire country rather than the select few in the military today.

First of all some of you should finish reading what I wrote. If you had finished reading you would have read that I am NOT an advocate of stopping existing smokers in the military by force of law. Nor am I an advocate of a general ban in the US. You all should really read more carefully.

Second, I don’t care if YOU as a private citizen smoke, but if you work for me, I don’t want you selling, transporting, or promoting the use of harmful tobacco products and if you work for the government, you work for me and every other tax payer.

Thirdly, we are not allowed to use profanity on this site… why do you suppose that is? For the same reason no one should be glorifying or advocating smoking or any other vice. Smoking is a vice you know. That is why it’s regulated. So is drinking, gambling, prostitution, pornography, etc. Vices are regulated because they tear at the fabric of society if they are not controlled, The object of regulation is not to ban vices, but keep them down to a low roar and tax them to pay for enforcement and clean up the damage they can do. Describing smoking as a “perk”, and a “luxury” and “relaxing” and “enjoyable” in a public forum is glorifying it.

Fourthly, nowhere did I say to make smoking illegal, not even in the military. What I said was tax dollars should not go to providing tobacco to troops. On the contrary, the troops should be encouraged by their superiors and the government to quit. That is quite a different thing.

Fifthly, smoking does not add to the common defense or raise military morale, it has the opposite effect.

Sixthly, as a minority, people who smoke don’t need to be going around attacking those who support their right to choose to smoke, (you are going to need all the friends you can get against the liberals) but smokers do need to step up and take financial responsibility for the damage it causes to themselves and society and not shove that responsibility on to those of us who don’t choose to smoke and expect us to pick up the tab for all the medical treatment they are going to need. (unless of course they started smoking before the warning labels came out and are addicted, the tobacco companies are paying that tab)

Seventhly, I don’t believe that over eating cause obesity; I believe eating junk food and drinking soda causes over eating and results in obesity. There is much evidence that High Fructose Corn Syrup (used to sweeten nearly all non-diet sodas and also found in many other foods) is actually addictive just like tobacco and damages the liver and prevents the body from burning its own fat. This results in food being turned into fat, but never being burned off and so the pounds just pile as our bodies crave food, but can’t burn it off. Add to that all of processed food on the shelves that is packed with cheap non-food ingredients (which I call “sawdust” ) and you have a recipe for a fat nation. Oh and by the way guess who owns all of the big food companies… yup the old tobacco companies. No wonder all the food is now addictive and bad for you. It’s not the fat in food that makes you fat, its the chemicals they put there like HFCS that kill your liver that make you fat. So yes, I don’t think that it’s a good idea for the government to be feeding HFCS to our troops, they need real food not addictive sawdust.

it is really difficult to describe this post in any other way.

Intentionally enabling our own troops to poison themselves, reduces their fitness, their strength, their stamina, and their wealth; and when in battle, the smoke and the smell gives away their position to the enemy. Out troops need every advantage they can get to stay alive and defeat the enemy, even if they don’t like it. That is why we make them do push ups and run for miles.

Chief, this is obviously going to be a real shock to you but for 400 years tobacco has come on a lot of varieties. The idea that you think troops smoke in combat situations really speaks more to your gobsmacking lack of familiarity with the subject.

I’m a non-smoker. In the field I used Red Man or Beechnut. Copenhagen was the preferred option for others. I suppose you could smoke them but I think you’d look pretty ridiculous doing so.

If you’ve ever tried to stay alert on a patrol when you may go 48 hrs without sleep you’d realize that tobacco can do more to increase your life span than shorten it.

And btw, if you are concerned about smell giving away your position you ought to demand that shaving cream, soap, deodorant, and toothpaste be banned, too. Trust me on this.

And why should my tax dollars be used to fund government employee’s time spent on the sale and distribution of such a poison.

They don’t. Cigarettes are usually purchased at the PX or off post. According to wikipedia, “AAFES funds 98% of its operating budget, including civilian employee salaries, inventory investments, utilities and capital investments for equipment, vehicles and facilities, from the sale of merchandise, food and services to customers.” AAFES is the Army and Air Force Exchange Service. In other words only 2% of AAFES operating budget comes from “your tax dollars”.

Intentionally enabling our own troops to poison themselves, reduces their fitness, their strength, their stamina,

I tell you what. Go to a nearby army post and challenge a smoker to a five mile foot race. When you can win, THEN you can complain about fitness, strength, and stamina.

and their wealth;

If you’re concerned about a soldiers wealth, then you should advocate reducing cigarette taxes or the idiotic DoD directive that requires the PX to charge outrageous prices for cigarettes.

and when in battle, the smoke and the smell gives away their position to the enemy.

Soldiers don’t smoke in battle. And if smoking on the FOB gives away your position then the enemy is horribly incompentant.

if they can pass the fitness tests, that is all we can ask. a large percentage of combat troops use tobacco. In case you didn’t notice, we have had trouble meeting retention and recruiting goals over the last several years. What sense does it make to alienate so many of our troops? I know this is not going to happen, or they will lay out a 20 or 30 year plan as to make it meaningless feel good liberal tripe. But I wonder about some here, what exactly are they thinking and what military experience have they had?

Wow, you really think of our military members as “serving the state”?
You do know that this is America and not North Korea or Iran, don’t you? My knowledge of the military is that troops in combat don’t serve the state, they fight for the brother in arms on either side of them. And if having a smoke or a dip or chew helps them save their life or the lives of their brothers, then smoke, chew and dip away.

And while they do the grown-up work that keeps us safe and alive, you can piddle your time away here at home thinking of all kinds of ways for YOU to serve the state better.

But some of you anti-smoking Nazis are really really scary.

And by scary I mean thoughtless, brainwashed, idiotic and scary stupid.

How about individual freedom coupled with individual responsibility? Have you ever considered that?

about why we have Comrade Obama as President and as a Nation are going to Hell in a handbasket. Behold, government speak and the produce of government school education!

What is going to happen when the new x smoker soldiers gain 50 or 100 lbs or more? I’ve never met anyone that quit smoking that didn’t gain a lot weight. After 25 weight doesn’t come off so easily even when someone tries. Someone in sleep deprived situation is going to eat if they don’t smoke. I’ve never been in the military but I’ve worked all night long shift jobs and people get heavy because they eat to stay awake or they smoke.

which were supposed to be a part of an enlisted man’s uniform, North and South. Didn’t last long, and after ‘61 they were never seen again except for dress and, occasionally on the parade ground for some units.

Controversy over “leggings” endured from at least the Civil War into WWII, maybe even later. You may recall the scene in the movie “Patton” where he is dressing the men down for their slovenlyness, well deserved, and he mentions the lack of leggings.

There was also much controversy over the havelock, a covering, usually white, for the kept-style cap that also covered the back of the neck to protect from the sun. In the Southern armies, the men usually dispensed even with the kepi and resorted to the time-proven wide-brimmed straw hat; regulations and officers be damned.