• Winner! Quick Shot Challenge: What’s the dumbest shooting myth you’ve heard?

    View thread

Bergdahl ?! Back Pay ?! SERIOUSLY ?!

I think I brought this up when the charges came out... though I thought that his back pay had already been given to him. And that they would have to 'get it back' even if spent or gone.

Technically, and I don't like it better than anyone, he is due back pay. You can't not pay someone. Even if he was getting the lowest pay rate of a slick sleeve right-out-of-basic private... it still adds up over the years. The question is whether it will be as a sergeant or if his reduction to private is retroactive to his capture. Interesting, too, whether he gets overseas duty pay, combat pay, jump pay... any of the other 'bumps' that could add up to a lot over 5 years. Hell, he'll probably now claim that he is fluent in Urdu and demand language pay.

But can't 'not' pay him. So, yes, he will walk out with a fat little check. Or a super fat check. But that will be nothing compared to the book deal, movie rights, etc.

If we're lucky, the Taliban have him whacked for spilling the beans on them.... Or better still, he OD's himself on Fentnyl in an alley somewhere.

Cheers,

Sirhr
 
Technically, and I don't like it better than anyone, he is due back pay. You can't not pay someone.
He is a deserter. Are deserters owed back pay? AFAIK pay accounts are suspended when someone is declared a deserter. In this shitbag's case, his desertion date should be set back to the day he left post since all the facts are now known.

So yes, there are ways of not paying someone.
 
^^^ That looks pretty unequivocal.... No soup for you!

Excellent. If they enforce it. Which would be excellent! Because then he would get NO pay and have to fork over $10K.

Though does he get paid for time spent incarcerated and awaiting trial? At what pay rate? Does the guilty plea make him retroactively forfeit while awaiting trial? I just have no faith that this guy won't somehow come out of this with a sh** ton more taxpayer money spent on his worthless butt. Not including any future costs for caring for soldiers injured while hunting for him... and damage caused by the asswipes that were traded to get him back.

Now that he has been proved guilty and we can see that he left intentionally... why exactly did we have to trade him back? He wasn't a man left behind. He was a turncoat who went to the other side. We don't bring back traitors... except by capture.

Again, I have little faith that we'll see anything but more clusterf&^$kedness...

Cheers,

Sirhr
 
23519133_1688023627935405_158972729186369049_n.jpg