Comments on: 9/11 GI Bill Update http://jarheadonline.com/2009/01/08/9-11-gi-bill-update/ Because Jarheads are everywhere Fri, 02 Jul 2010 21:21:17 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Jerry http://jarheadonline.com/2009/01/08/9-11-gi-bill-update/comment-page-1/#comment-1064 Jerry Wed, 21 Jan 2009 05:41:02 +0000 http://jarheadonline.com/?p=487#comment-1064 I'm hoping to get the 9-11 GI Bill set up for approval at my school (it's in Europe) and that basically leads to a huge pain in the tail end. Even though I am eligible for the funds, until the school (which is a full university since 1918) gets approved I have no insurance that I can actually get the money. It will be an interesting summer trying to get everything situated. Yep, yet another stressor about the 9-11 GI Bill... and I'm not even trying to transfer it to my kid. Jerry I’m hoping to get the 9-11 GI Bill set up for approval at my school (it’s in Europe) and that basically leads to a huge pain in the tail end. Even though I am eligible for the funds, until the school (which is a full university since 1918) gets approved I have no insurance that I can actually get the money. It will be an interesting summer trying to get everything situated. Yep, yet another stressor about the 9-11 GI Bill… and I’m not even trying to transfer it to my kid.
Jerry

]]> By: Miss Em http://jarheadonline.com/2009/01/08/9-11-gi-bill-update/comment-page-1/#comment-1045 Miss Em Fri, 09 Jan 2009 04:10:38 +0000 http://jarheadonline.com/?p=487#comment-1045 Jarhead, Woke-up and followed the links to the explantion of what you were writing about. Guess the holidays made the brain very slow on the up-take. ***** If anything ANY person who joins the Military whether it was before 9/11 or after they should be able to qualify or be grandfathered in for this benifit. To be forced to pay monies for 'involuntary retirement' is just plain wrong. {Hell 'involuntary retirement' just sounds wrong. I not being Military do not understand why the Military would toss out a person with the years and experience that is needed in leading and instructioning the younger members. I have read here in these blogs where you, Jarhead, have asked what happened to the mentors for the young Marines--this 'involuntary retirement' might be one of those reasons.} The Military Brass along with the Members of Congress needs to get this right for the MEN and WOMEN who serve DESERVE everything that this Nation can provide to them for that service. Jarhead,

Woke-up and followed the links to the explantion of what you were writing about. Guess the holidays made the brain very slow on the up-take.
*****
If anything ANY person who joins the Military whether it was before 9/11 or after they should be able to qualify or be grandfathered in for this benifit. To be forced to pay monies for ‘involuntary retirement’ is just plain wrong.

{Hell ‘involuntary retirement’ just sounds wrong. I not being Military do not understand why the Military would toss out a person with the years and experience that is needed in leading and instructioning the younger members.
I have read here in these blogs where you, Jarhead, have asked what happened to the mentors for the young Marines–this ‘involuntary retirement’ might be one of those reasons.}

The Military Brass along with the Members of Congress needs to get this right for the MEN and WOMEN who serve DESERVE everything that this Nation can provide to them for that service.

]]> By: Jarhead http://jarheadonline.com/2009/01/08/9-11-gi-bill-update/comment-page-1/#comment-1044 Jarhead Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:22:57 +0000 http://jarheadonline.com/?p=487#comment-1044 NCCM I know that it was a retention tool but to leave out those that have served since 9/11 would be a mistake. NCCM

I know that it was a retention tool but to leave out those that have served since 9/11 would be a mistake.

]]> By: NCCM USN(ret) http://jarheadonline.com/2009/01/08/9-11-gi-bill-update/comment-page-1/#comment-1043 NCCM USN(ret) Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:17:57 +0000 http://jarheadonline.com/?p=487#comment-1043 I can see losing the benefit of transferring the GI-bill to a dependent but the service member would still be eligible for it to use him/herself. I would hope any pay back would be in the loss of months used by the dependent, dependent used 10 months the service member would have 26 months remaining. The transferability of the 9/11 bill was added only for retention purposes after much wrangling and was not part of the original bill. Great site btw :) I can see losing the benefit of transferring the GI-bill to a dependent but the service member would still be eligible for it to use him/herself. I would hope any pay back would be in the loss of months used by the dependent, dependent used 10 months the service member would have 26 months remaining.

The transferability of the 9/11 bill was added only for retention purposes after much wrangling and was not part of the original bill.

Great site btw :)

]]> By: Miss Em http://jarheadonline.com/2009/01/08/9-11-gi-bill-update/comment-page-1/#comment-1042 Miss Em Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:50:31 +0000 http://jarheadonline.com/?p=487#comment-1042 Does this part of the bill include those who have to be medically retired due to injuries received while fighting the War on Terror? Jarhead, Please answer the question here in the comments. Does this part of the bill include those who have to be medically retired due to injuries received while fighting
the War on Terror?

Jarhead,
Please answer the question here in the comments.

]]>