fer shame, fer shame!!
Menard fined $7,000 for sexual affair while on duty in Afghanistan - thestar.com
Menard fined $7,000 for sexual affair while on duty in Afghanistan - thestar.com
Slap On Wrist For Canada`s Finest Military Man...
- Thread starter JBeee
- Start date
The affair lasted approx 4 months so gettin my pen, pad, calc and head thinkin and going real hard like here - works out to about 1750 a month, divided by 30 days take plus or minus, about 58 Cdn a day. Now that is about 2.44 an hour.
Well below minimum wage.
But he's paying the state not the woman. So really, she's a sex slave and the state her pimp. For shame indeed!
Only the military could possibly think they have the right to control who is screwing whom. Probably the only time Trudeau was right was when he said the government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation.
I think you'd find that most employers have rules about someone having an affair with a subordinate, and for the military it is even more important.
If this was a Snr NCO he would be in jail, reduction in rank - even if retired - affects severance pay - he would have been slammed for this and interfering with an investigation - He got off lightly compared to what an ordinary Soldier would receive.
So yes he was treated lightly.
Sexual affairs, as long as they are not with the enemy should be of no concern in my opinion, we trust our soldier to be kill when needed but if they want a little sexual release they're strung up like some deviant. Seems backwards to me....
Soldiers are to follow orders - he did not - Whether you think the order is dumb or not - the orders were legal and he screwed up, or down, or sideways, or doggy style. But he screwed up and knew better.
Should he receive a stiffer sentence than a Cpl or a Sgt - Yes.
I agree to a point but I think some of these rules stuck are rather archaic, does banging a woman really detract from your duties as a soldier?
Scenario - Sgt bangin a Cpl - Patrols - Shzt job comes up - leading point thru an area in a vilaage known as filled with IED's, etc. Sgt does not ever pick the Cpl. Figure that one and then you can realize why the rules are there - backwards or not.
Troops are stressed yes - Let them have some beers and bring in hookers. Wonder how the public would react to the hookers part- Local girls supports the Troops by getting on their backs.
Having an intimate relationship with a subordinate means that when decisions have to be made involving that subordinate, your judgement is swayed by personal factors. That's why it's not allowed.
For the same basic reason, doctors are not allowed to treat family members. The relationship changes the judgement.
It's fairly obvious and simple.
For thousands of years Armies had camp followers - You could find all the needs, eat, drink and fuk there - Not now. We can kill, but we can't fuk or drink.
The women that were victims of the armies were not fellow soldiers, and today's women are coming forward ensuring prosecution and conviction. Times were different. However, if the military is going to become exclusively remote control drones, then it's more civilized and the rules maybe should be relaxed somewhere in the future.