Military Vaccines

I know in one of our "Commander in Chiefs" recent bumbling Hitler wannabe addresses he bumped the timeline of Covid19 vaccination for the military up to immediately, or as soon as possible, instead of the later set date.

I know our military gets pumped full of all sorts of things. But it seemed like there was talk that this jab was/is a "line in the sand©️". Some talk of the possibility of dissertation. I haven't heard or seen any updates on this situation. But I'm sure anything negative would be buried. And and awols would be rounded up quick and thrown in jail.

I find the whole forced vaccines of any stripe disturbing. But I'm o lne of those whacks that finds the government involving themselves in healthcare and funding science in general disturbing.
Not saying every scientist and or doctor is guilty of it but I bet a lot of them find exactly what the goverment wants them to find so they can keep working. Its messed up but in a way I do understand why they would do that. At the end of the day we all have mouths to feed, a mortgage/rent, and a s.o. to keep happy. Lifes tough in the first world.*sarcasm*

It's a strange world we are living in. I hope all of you stay safe and try to stay sanish.

a reply to: SwampFox999

The people in charge are very concerned that this particular vaccination will result in the loss of good order and discipline.

Here's what they're actually doing: they're making the troops stand in lines; they're making them fill out a bunch of paperwork (which results in a vaccine passport); they're walking them up to the table; just before the moment of truth, they're asking, "Are you being coerced into taking this shot?" If the answer is, "Yes" they're being walked off for re-education.

Re-education is a warning that they're going to be shoving a Q-Tip up into your brain anytime they feel like doing it to you.

originally posted by: SwampFox999
I know in one of our "Commander in Chiefs" recent bumbling Hitler wannabe addresses he bumped the timeline of Covid19 vaccination for the military up to immediately, or as soon as possible, instead of the later set date.

I know our military gets pumped full of all sorts of things. But it seemed like there was talk that this jab was/is a "line in the sand©️". Some talk of the possibility of dissertation. I haven't heard or seen any updates on this situation. But I'm sure anything negative would be buried. And and awols would be rounded up quick and thrown in jail.

I find the whole forced vaccines of any stripe disturbing. But I'm o lne of those whacks that finds the government involving themselves in healthcare and funding science in general disturbing.
Not saying every scientist and or doctor is guilty of it but I bet a lot of them find exactly what the goverment wants them to find so they can keep working. Its messed up but in a way I do understand why they would do that. At the end of the day we all have mouths to feed, a mortgage/rent, and a s.o. to keep happy. Lifes tough in the first world.*sarcasm*

It's a strange world we are living in. I hope all of you stay safe and try to stay sanish.

This is not new for the military. It was the same for the Anthrax vaccine. Many military members that refused to get the vaccine where discharge from service with a honorable discharge.

When it comes to the questions as why the military does this the answer is simple. Readiness

The military operates all over the world. There are countries that requires either 14 day isolation or a vaccines to let citizens from other countries to come in. If I have a team of 100 members and half of them aren’t vaccinated and we need to travel to a country that requires vaccination then I lose half of my team. That’s what the military is looking at.

a reply to: Deplorable
That meme about had me spitting my water out. Lol


Bunch, I understand the need for that with the military. My dad got pumped full of juice he said. He was overseas alot with the army in the 80s. Just with the covid vaccine you're seeing an uproar not seen in recent years over. Coming from a multi generation military family(I am the black sheep and didnt serve.) I've never heard of people opting out of or leaving the service over a vaccine before.
And given the current full on propaganda I figured if a lot of service members left we wouldnt hear about it anyways.

I find the whole thing to be a farce. I think the covid19 and circumstances extending from that are a coverup/distraction for something way bigger than a new cold virus. I have no idea what, but its gotta be fairly large considering some countries appear to be going "full nazi". The U.S. included.

a reply to: Bunch

Yea but now we have 2 potential vaccine resistant variants, personally I put in for retirement for a couple reasons but this was in there.

a reply to: Irishhaf
What branch were you in? Was there a lot of others doing the same?

Considering they had to change the definition of the term vaccine specifically for these vaccines, I would say that alone is a good reason to be able to refuse.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Bunch

Yea but now we have 2 potential vaccine resistant variants, personally I put in for retirement for a couple reasons but this was in there.

I’ve seen some of this on my end too. Also when medical exemptions and religious accommodations are exhausted for those seeking them I wouldn’t be surprised if many people are separated from the service. In my unit though many that had previously not gotten in it are slowly moving to get it so who knows.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Considering they had to change the definition of the term vaccine specifically for these vaccines, I would say that alone is a good reason to be able to refuse.

Not really. Member can pursue religious accommodation or a medical exemption. What you mentioned doesn’t fall into either.

originally posted by: Bunch

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Considering they had to change the definition of the term vaccine specifically for these vaccines, I would say that alone is a good reason to be able to refuse.

Not really. Member can pursue religious accommodation or a medical exemption. What you mentioned doesn’t fall into either.

I'd say there is a good argument with it that can be had and won in court.

The definition of vaccine when they signed up was not what it is now. These covid vaccines are not vaccines in the same sense. They can't change a definition of the term AND hold anyone to their original contract. They can have you sign a new one with the updated terminology, but if anyone can change the definition of a term in a contract then without repercussion then we would have a MUCH bigger problem.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Bunch

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Considering they had to change the definition of the term vaccine specifically for these vaccines, I would say that alone is a good reason to be able to refuse.

Not really. Member can pursue religious accommodation or a medical exemption. What you mentioned doesn’t fall into either.

I'd say there is a good argument with it that can be had and won in court.

The definition of vaccine when they signed up was not what it is now. These covid vaccines are not vaccines in the same sense. They can't change a definition of the term AND hold anyone to their original contract. They can have you sign a new one with the updated terminology, but if anyone can change the definition of a term in a contract then without repercussion then we would have a MUCH bigger problem.

There is no court in the US that will hear this though. Military courts and there to enforce military law/policy and the policy is for members to get the vaccine. Military members can’t sue on Federal Court due to Feres doctrine. So there really no other way, get the vaccine, get an exemption or get separated.

a reply to: SwampFox999

Here is a short article on what happened during the 2000 Anthrax vaccine:

www.militarytimes.com...

Again, this is not new for the military or those of us who have been in for some years now.

why does the White House get to be exempt?

originally posted by: Bunch

There is no court in the US that will hear this though. Military courts and there to enforce military law/policy and the policy is for members to get the vaccine. Military members can’t sue on Federal Court due to Feres doctrine. So there really no other way, get the vaccine, get an exemption or get separated.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Contract law is different. If you have a written contract with someone, even the US Government, you can take them to court if they are in breach of that contract. You can even get a temporary injunction against the enforcement of that contract until the matter is resolved.

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I don’t think you understand the precedent of the Anthrax Vaccination Program. DoD back then made it mandatory while it was in EUA status back in 1999. Military members (at that time ironically were many leftist members) sued and won in court to have it stopped (ironically also by dear Judge Emmet Sullivan). Judge Sullivan stopped the program in 2004 on two grounds:
1. It was not approved by the FDA
2. It broke the doctrine of informed consent

Once the FDA approved the vaccine the program restarted on 2006.

This time around the government waited until the FDA had approved the vaccine to make it mandatory. So no argument can be made that it is experimental. The services are offering medical and religious exemptions though.

originally posted by: Bunch
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I don’t think you understand the precedent of the Anthrax Vaccination Program. DoD back then made it mandatory while it was in EUA status back in 1999. Military members (at that time ironically were many leftist members) sued and won in court to have it stopped (ironically also by dear Judge Emmet Sullivan). Judge Sullivan stopped the program in 2004 on two grounds:
1. It was not approved by the FDA
2. It broke the doctrine of informed consent

Once the FDA approved the vaccine the program restarted on 2006.

This time around the government waited until the FDA had approved the vaccine to make it mandatory. So no argument can be made that it is experimental. The services are offering medical and religious exemptions though.

I think the argument can be made that the current Covid drugs do not meet the definition of "vaccine" as it was defined when the contract was agreed to by both parties, as Vasa Croe pointed out. One party can't go around changing the definitions of terms after the contract is signed. Imagine if the service member who signed the contract was able to change the definitions of terms three years into enlistment without the approval of the Government.

A contract is a contract.

It would seem totally appropriate that if both sides don't agree to the change in definition of the terms for the matter to be settled in a court of contract law, with a temporary injunction in effect until the matter is settled.

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Exactly.

Similarly, what if they changed the contract to make time in service 10 years AFTER you signed up for 4?

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I mean you can sue for anything in this country. Doesn’t mean it will anywhere.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Exactly.

Similarly, what if they changed the contract to make time in service 10 years AFTER you signed up for 4?

Then just re-define "years" in your contract to mean "Mercury years", which are 88 days.

originally posted by: Bunch
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I mean you can sue for anything in this country. Doesn’t mean it will anywhere.

True, but it does present the government with some unpleasant options.

1. They could try to have the case thrown out of court, but I think the case has merit. I don't see how a judge with any integrity can dismiss a case were one party changes the terms of a contract after the fact. Of course, it shouldn't be too hard to find a judge lacking integrity these days. Still, it would set a bad precedent in corporate law, and it wouldn't do a lot for the image of the US military in particular or the US Government as a whole. Who would want to do business with the government when they could change the terms of a contract on a whim and you would have no legal recourse? Who would want to join the military knowing they could redefine '___' as a vaccine and force you to take it?

2. They could go to trial and win the case. Same problems as #1. Imagine if the precedent is set that one party of a contract and re-define terms without the agreement of other parties. Just imagine how that would affect mortgages. I would expect a verdict like that to be quickly overturned.

3. They could go to trial and lose. Then they would have to resort to the same methods of forced drug use we're seeing now in the civilian community. Coercion, bribery, threats, peer pressure, etc. Again, not a good look for the military and I'm sure that would drive recruitment down. They might have to resort to another peacetime draft.