The Greatest Book

I have got the perfect book for you and your spouse!!!!!!!!!!! It's called 101 Nights of Great Sex.

WAIT!!!! Before you roll your eyes and mutter about porn and inappropriatness and close this blog, hear me out.

Stonewall and I have been married for a little under a year and we are still in the honeymoon phase of our marriage. We aren't having problems in that area yet (and hopefully never), but that doesn't mean we don't keep things going without a little help. We've been known to buy a sex book or watch porn together. Both of which give us some excellent ideas. This book though has been the best purchase so far.

I know, you may be thinking, "But this kind of stuff is for the couples who have lost the spark and want to get it flaming again."

WRONG!!!

Let me tell you, Stonewall and I have never lost our spark. In fact, we've found that its this type of thing that helps keep the spark going. Nobody has all the answers. You can get as creative as you think is possible and the next day read about something new. Its just like anything else in this world, you can always learn more. Sex is no different.

So back to the book. The book contains 101 way to have great sex. However, not all of the 101 ways are sex. The book included ways to flirt with and woo your partner, not just please them in the sack. The other fun aspect of the book is that all of the ideas are sealed shut. Once a week each person rips out an idea and then spends the week setting up the encounter. It is always a surprise as to what your partner will do next to curl your toes. Plus, since your partner knows something should be coming, you won't want to let them down by not seeing your idea through.

The great thing about the book is that anything goes. Even though some of the ideas cost money or include travel, that doesn't mean you can't use your imagination to make the ideas fit your budget and time schedule. Even if your normal routine includes an idea in the book, use your imagination to change it up a little. No matter how amazing or unsatisfactory your sex life currently is, this book will only up the experience.

I'm a firm believer in laughing...anytime, anyplace, including during sex. Stonewall and I make each other laugh all the time during sex. Even while your laughing you can be romantic. Since this book is about using your imagination and stretching beyond your normal boundries, you never know whether the next move you or your partner makes will be "Legends of the Fall" romantic or "Fever Pitch" romantic

Geez, are you still reading this?! Go buy the book and start romancing!!!!!

More Military Bling!

I just found this website, Beadwork by Sheree. She makes deployment bracelets, so family members can wear the name of their loved one serving overseas. They cost $39.00 and can be personalized with the servicemember's name and the branch they are serving in. Also, a portion of the proceeds from each bracelet is donated to non-profit organizations that assist military personnel and their families.

State of the Union Address: Rewarding Military Families

Last night President Bush gave his seventh annual State of the Union address. One of the subjects that he spoke about was military families. The President is asking Congress to provide more rewards and support for, not only servicemembers, but their families as well.

"Our military Families also sacrifice for America. They endure sleepless nights and the daily struggle of providing for children while a loved one is serving far from home. We have a responsibility to provide for them. So I ask you to join me in expanding their access to child care, creating new hiring preferences for military spouses across the federal government, and allowing our troops to transfer their unused education benefits to their spouses or children. Our military Families serve our nation, they inspire our nation, and tonight our nation honors them." - President George W. Bush’s State of the Union address, Jan. 28, 2008.

More information can be found here.

Military Spouse - Chance or Fate?

Different people join the military for different reasons. Some join for the education assistance, others because they want to travel or they don't know what else to do. I hope, and I believe, that most join because they believe that there is something greater than themselves and being the protectors of America and her citizens is what they were ultimately meant to do. What about the military spouses, though? Is it chance that we end up belonging to the military even though we are not soldiers, or is it fate and we too recognize that some things are more important than ourselves?

I applied and got accepted to college during my senior year in high school. However, I was also toying with the idea of enlisting in the military (this was before 9/11). I say toying because I never really seriously considered it. The idea appealed to me, but I'm the girl who likes high heels and makeup and sleeping in. I was afraid of boot camp and the horror stories I'd seen in movies. Even when I mentioned in passing the idea to my family, they laughed and teased me about being the girl who would try and change the camo to pink.

During college, I loved my majors and I don't regret much about what happened during those years. However, whenever I would see students that belonged to the ROTC program, I would have a feeling of wonderment and the sense that they were a part of something greater that I too wanted to be a part of. (I was a journalism student and about 1/4 of my stories involved the military.) I couldn't quite put my finger on the feelings, especially since I knew being a soldier was not for me. I would not be able to get up at 4:00 AM and do drills or (as vain as this will sound) wear the uniforms and boots and my hair in a bun no matter what the occasion. That was not me.

I volunteered for different military charities. I sent packages to Iraq and Afghanistan as part of the My Soldier program. I would donate money (when I had it) to different military charities. When my sister needed help getting together packages to send to soldiers, I helped her. However, this still did not seem like enough.

After I graduated from college, I once again looked into joining the military. This time more specifically, the Navy. I was a college graduate, so I looked in to what I would have to do to become an officer. I was in the recruiters office one time though, and there was another girl there as well. She was also looking into what she had to do to become an officer. There was something about her, though, that I did not have. She had a confidence about her that simply radiated, "I WANT to be an officer in the military. I WANT to be a soldier." I, honestly, did not have that same feeling. I wanted to contribute to the military. I wanted to be a part of what the military does, but I did not want to be a soldier.

Then I met Stonewall. I knew from the beginning he was an officer in the Army. We dated for three weeks before he was sent to Iraq for the first time. When he asked me to marry him, it finally clicked in me what I was meant to do. I was not meant to be a soldier. I am meant to be a soldier's wife. The greater purpose of my life is to be at the home front supporting my soldier, as no one else can.

I read and hear about it all the time. Those who are not a part of a military family want to know how difficult it is when our soldiers are away. They want to know how we deal with the pressures and stresses of "belonging" to the government and being at the beck and call of the military. The truth of it is, it is not always easy. In the past year, there have been at least a dozen times when I've wanted to go knocking on doors and call the President and give them all a piece of my mind.

We know though, that no matter how difficult the deployments are or how many months out of the year we are separated from our soldier, in the end, it is all worth it. A sense of duty speaks to our minds and our hearts and we muster all of our strength and courage and answer. We provide a service that no one else can. When my soldier is hurt, sad, far from home, tired, or a million other things, I let him know that I am here for him. I support him, even if no one else does. I'm the one who will always be here to welcome him home. I'm the one he thinks about when he can't come home or when things seem impossible. And just like every other military spouse, I do it because I know my soldier is making the ultimate sacrifice and I don't want him to have to do it alone.

Was it merely chance that Stonewall and I met or fate that brought us together? Well, whichever it was, I know I've found my place as a military spouse. My husband and soldier will give his life for citizens of other countries and for American citizens, and so I give my life to him.

Stop-Loss...Again

As of late, a topic I am seeing being discussed is the issue of stop-loss. I myself even posted about it here. Another blogger wrote a nice post about the topic the other day, however, there was a comment to the post that I highly disagree with and wish to address here.

The comment was as follows:
"I do not blame this boy -- this Man, for not wanting to go back. I think it is this country that is letting him down, for not coming up with a better solution to the shortages in the Army, the branch of the services that IS carrying the bulk of the burden over there, to be sure."

According to this comment, our country, which I assume to mean our government and those who run the military, need to come up with a better solution than stop-loss to end the shortages that our military face. Stop-loss was the better solution. The previous solution was the Draft. Forcing men who had absolutely no interest in serving in the military to serve. Rather than bringing in brand new soldiers who have no interest in the military, the government is now requiring those who have joined on their own free will to serve longer. And once again, I must reiterate, that the contract that was signed on day one of soldier's military service says that the stop-loss policy can be put into effect.

The comment also says that a better solution is necessary to relieve the burden that our soldiers face by having to serve for so long. I have to wonder though, who creates that burden? Can we say the government creates that burden? Technically, yes. However, do we never go to war then? Do we not send aide to foreign countries when they need it? Do we get rid of our military all together and hope that the rest of the world lives in peaceful harmony along with us?

Or, are those who are leaving the military before they completely serve their time, creating the burden? If there is a need for 200 soldiers to go to battle again, (and we will go to battle because we do not live in a bubble and there will always be a need for soldiers) and 50 of them do what they can to get out of the military or they simply run, who created the burden for the other 150 soldiers? Not the government, but those who chose not to fight with the rest of them. The country is not letting the soldiers down. The soldiers who run are letting their fellow soldiers and Americans down.

A final comment was made ("Not since Vietnam have soldiers been deployed for a year at a time...") which I understood to say that not since Vietnam have our soldiers been deployed for more than 12 months at a time and now they are being deployed for much longer periods. When it comes to active duty, I really have no idea, so I can't comment for them. However, National Guard is a different story. In the past, yes, National Guardsmen were deployed for an 18 month period. Recently, though, a memo was released that said the new policy is that the National Guard will not be deployed for more than 12 months. Therefore, the 6 months of training prior to a deployment would be much more intensive. Common sense also says that being stop-lossed during those 6 months would help all the soldiers to be better trained and better prepared for the upcoming deployment.

Our military, for the most part, is under the control of our government. When the government calls, our military answers. That is the way it works. If the government says fight, the military fights. I do not now, nor will I ever, understand a soldier or a soldier's family, that chooses to fight our military or government on this particular situation. What gives them the right, what makes them so special, that they think they don't have to serve longer or fight in the war?

I'm not going to say, "You knew what you were getting into." I think that is an inaccurate statement because no one can see the future. However, if you are a surgeon, you know you will find yourself performing surgery one day. If you are a lawyer, you can bet you'll be in a courtroom eventually. If you are a soldier, there is a good chance you will be deployed and more than once.

There was a story circulating the milblogosphere a few days ago about Cpl. Chris Mason. Currently, there is a MySpace page about Chris. There is a quote on that page attributed to him: "We chose to come into the Army knowing that we could be sent over here, but we chose that anyway because we choose to believe that the American flag that we wear on our right shoulder stands for something that's greater than ourselves."

Whether you join the military by becoming a soldier or you join by marrying a soldier, you know this is why you are here on this earth. You love your spouse, you love your children, and you love your country and you know that some things are always worth fighting for (many times more than once) and worth dying for and you accept that.

Dining-Out

My very first dining-out was a huge success! I had a great time! The food was great, the alcohol was tasty, and the company was the best.

I was feeling pretty nervous since this was my first formal Army affair, but even though there were uniforms everywhere, things were pretty laid back. There were a lot of "Sirs" and "Mams" floating around, but they were usually preceded with a joke or some other light-hearted banter. Since I don't live on or even near a base, I don't usually see the day-to-day workings of ranks, but Saturday night was very relaxed and I felt at ease within minutes (I'm sure the alcohol helped with this as well.).

We got to see the Grog ceremony, which I'm told is usually reserved for dining-ins (soldiers only, as opposed to dining-outs which are soldiers and their civilian guests). This was...interesting. Basically, it consisted of pouring a whole lot of different alcohols into one pot and then drinking it. Each liquor/wine that was poured into the pot represented a different part of the National Guard. The first batch tasted like really liquored up punch, but the more alcohol they added the nastier that stuff got. I stuck to my vodkas and pineapple juice.

The entertainment of the evening was provided by a guest speaker and each company planned a skit. While the skits were funny, there were parts I did not get because they were inside jokes among the soldiers. The soldiers, however, were rolling.

While the dinner itself ended pretty early, the evening continued with everyone breaking off into their own groups and hanging out in their hotel rooms. The evening was so much fun. I am looking forward to my next dining-out. In fact, we (the FRG) are planning a dining-out for our unit before they deploy. I am so excited for it! I just know it will be even more fun and entertaining!

My First Formal Army Event

This weekend is my very first formal Army event. I'm pretty excited about it. I'm also a little nervous. I hope I don't trip or make a complete ass out of myself. This is a dinner and my dress is ivory, so there is a good chance I will have to walk around half the evening with a food stain on my chest. Excellent.

However, I am a girly girl, so any opportunity to wear a pretty dress and heals is okay by me. Plus, we get to stay in a hotel and that is always a fun little adventure in my book. I don't have to make the bed or clean the bathroom and ROOM SERVICE!! Breakfast in bed is always a good thing.

Anywho...this is a pic of my dress. I love dressing up!

Disney and MREs

Stonewall and I are thinking about taking a vacation to Disney, so we went to an AAA event yesterday that went through all the packages and perks of booking a Disney vacation through AAA. Like most people, I am HUGE Disney fan (My best friend and I went there for our Senior Spring Break and I can whoop ass in all Disney trivia games.), however, they have managed to disappoint me.

Over the past few years, Disney has added many perks for staying in one of their resorts. This includes special ticket prices/packages, room packages and dining packages. As a military family we were thinking about staying in Shades of Green, which is Disney's resort for military families and guests. The room rates for Shades of Green are really reasonable and affordable and the resort itself looks just as amazing as the other Disney resort.

However, if you stay at Shades of Green you can not get one of Disney's food packages. While every other Disney resort staying person can partake in the money saving dining package and not spend $12 every afternoon on a hot dog, military families and their guests staying in Shades of Green cannot.

I really don't understand that. Military families can save money on the accomodations, but not on the food. Maybe they figure we don't want the dining package because we bring our own MREs.

Hell Hath Frozen Over

It snowed in Baghdad.

Stop-Loss

As I briefly mentioned in my last post, there is new movie coming out in March called Stop-Loss. I think the title of the movie and the previews give you a pretty good idea of what the movie is about. I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'll take the shot in dark here and say it is about the controversial stop-loss policy. (I'll admit, I read a spoiler for the movie. I'll just say that the movie sounds amazing and I was pleased with the ending, but that's all I'll say. I don't want to ruin it for anyone.)

Along with the official movie website, Paramount has launched another website called Stop-Loss Sound Off. This site is for service members and their families to post comments and videos about their experiences with the policy and with the military in general. The movie's director, Kimberly Peirce also posted on the site and she has made it clear that the movie isn't simply about the stop-policy, but also about a soldier's journey and experiences when he is stop-lossed.

Okay, now for me and my opinion. For the record, I whole-heartedly believe that the stop-loss policy will always be a source of tension and turmoil in our military simply because there are two very distinct sides to this issue. The need to have soldiers in our military and the need of the soldiers to move forward in their lives. I believe that both sides have valid points and neither side will ever be fully right. However, in this issue I side with our military and the need to use the stop-loss policy.

To many this policy seems unfair. A contract for so many number of years is signed, but at the end of those years, you're told you still can't leave. Let's face it, in the real world if you signed a lease, a contract, to live in an apartment for 1 year, at the end of the year the owner can not make you stay in that apartment longer. However, as most military families will tell you, the military is not the "real world" nor is it always fair. I've been married to a soldier for just less than a year and already I need more fingers and toes to count how many Army policies/rules/ behaviors seem to be unfair.

Here's the thing though, the contract a soldier signs does say that he/she can be stop-lossed. At no point is this policy a surprise to the soldier. When that contract is signed you are signing on for so many years at a minimum. After those minimum amount of years are complete, the military can chose to extend your contract because you agreed that they could. It's a part of being in the military. Just like camo, MREs, war, kissing someone's ass to get a promotion, Tricare and saluting are also a part of the military. You take the good with the bad. The Stop-Loss policy is considered one of the bad, but it is there for a reason.

Many states are creating a new unit called the PTAE, Pre-mobilization Training Assistance Element. One of the purposes of this unit is to make sure deploying units are trained as fully as they can be. One of the reasons this type of unit is necessary is because soldiers and their families are trying to sue the military, and this includes unit Commanders such as Stonewall, for not properly training them before sending them to war.

Stonewall is National Guard. When he found out his unit was set to deploy, drill weekends became a life line. He sees his soldiers once a month and 2-3 weeks during the summer. Between announcement time and deployment time, that left Stonewall with approximately 30 days of face-time and training time with his soldiers. 30 days, and not 30 consecutive days, to train soldiers to fight and survive.

Now here is where stop-loss comes into play and ties these two units together. In the National Guard soldiers can be stop-lossed 90 days prior to deployment. We have not reached those 90 days yet. Every drill weekend Stonewall is losing soldiers who have decided they no longer want to be in the military because they do not want to go to Iraq and so they are trying to find loopholes and ways to get out of the military.

While these soldiers will eventually be replaced and the new soldiers will be deployed with the unit, these are soldiers who have trained with the unit for less than a month. Is that enough time to fully prepare for deployment? I don't know; some would say it is, some would say it isn't enough time. All of the soldiers will be trained as best as they can be and that will be considered good enough to send them to Iraq, but like I mentioned, soldiers are trying to sue the military for improper training. But whose fault is it that these soldiers are not getting the training they feel they should get?

The blame can not be put entirely on the military. Stonewall is doing the best he can to train his soldiers. It is not his fault soldiers are leaving and new soldiers are being sent to him at the last minute. Whether anyone likes it or not we are at war and we need to send soldiers to Iraq. We can not stop sending units to Iraq because some quit and force more work and responsibility on others. Our military must train our soldiers as best it can in a very short amount of time. It is the soldiers who run that put the undue pressure and responsibility on the unit leaders, the remaining unit, and the new soldiers.

The Stop-Loss policy takes some of that pressure to deploy fully trained off of Stonewall and the other leaders of the unit and puts it on the rest of the unit. In fact, Stonewall would rather stop-loss go into effect the day they learn they will be deployed. Then he knows that his soldiers are trained to the best of his and their abilities. There is no questioning whether a new soldier has learned all the ropes. Instead, Stonewall would lead soldiers that he has worked with for the past year.

Stop-loss exists to protect the soldiers. More fully trained and experienced soldiers are sent to Iraq because they have best ability to stay alive over there and complete the mission, so that all the soldiers can come home. Yes, it is true that there will be soldiers who do not come home safely or at all, but that is the reality we face in the military. It is a reality all soldiers must face. In the long run though, I think stop-loss saves more lives because its the experienced soldiers that are resent to Iraq and it is the soldiers who have had more valuable training time before being deployed.

My husband was essentially stop-lossed the day he took command of his unit. It was agreed that he would not leave this unit until after the deployment. The deployment has been pushed back 3 times now and so he remains with his unit. I do not feel sorry for the others who will be stop-lossed. It is their experience and their time that will help bring my soldier home, along with the soldier whose wife is having a baby in a few months, the soldier who has 3 children all under the age of 5, and the soldier whose Mom gives all her free time to our FRG. They do not leave the unit because they want to fight, it is what they agreed to do when they signed their contract and took their oath and they will do it until the military agrees their time in the NG is finished.

There are 2 sides to this coin. In a few years, I may prefer the other side. Are those who fight stop-loss dishonorable or anti-America? I do not believe so. I have never been to Iraq, but I can't imagine there are many who want to go back after they made it home safely the first time. I know I do not want Stonewall to have to go back, but its what he does, what he agreed to do. When I married him, I signed up for the military and the deployments as well, whether it was within his 4 years or not.

Katrina Caused How Much Damage?!

I was going to write about the new movie coming out in March called Stop-Loss and a website called Stop-Loss Sound Off that lets military families post comments and videos regarding the stop-loss policy. However, on the way to work this morning I heard on the radio about a lawsuit that survivors of Katrina are bringing against the government and I feel more compelled to write about that.

From what I heard, 500,000 families that are refugees from Katrina are suing the government for $300,000,000,000,000,000. (I don't even remember the word for that much money.) If you break it down, that is approximately $6 billion per family.

I'm not saying those families, among thousands of others, did not suffer because of Katrina. I can't even imagine what they must have gone through and what it must feel like for them to have lost everything. Katrina was a horrible disaster and I hope Americans never have to suffer through another disaster like Katrina.

That being said...The families are suing the government for not issuing the mandatory evacuation soon enough. Can someone please explain to me how this is the government's fault? Last time I checked, weather forecasts were not determined by the government. In fact, I can even pick up my newspaper or go to my local TV station and see an up-to-date weather report. Weather reports are available to the public now. If the weather man is calling for a thunderstorm, I'm not going to go outside and wait for the lightening to strike. However, if I do go outside and I get struck by lightening, I'm not going to sue the government for not issuing the warning to stay indoors.

So, if your local weather man tells you a massive hurricane is a-comin', get the hell out of Dodge!! It is not the government's responsibility to tell you leave. Let's think, for a moment, about why the government issued a mandatory evacuation. Because your dumb ass was still sitting in your living room in New Orleans instead of in your car driving in the opposite direction! If you had packed up what you could when the warnings and recommended evacuations first started, a mandatory evacuation would not have been necessary.

Whether you like it or not, sometimes you just have to have a plan. Most families have a plan, an escape route, if there is a fire or a break-in. Leaving stuff behind is hard, but sometimes you have to do it to survive. Here's a story to illustrate my point. After 9/11, it was feared that nuclear power plants would be targeted. At the time, I lived, worked, and went to school within a 10-mile radius of a nuclear power plant. In the event of an attack on the plant we would not be permitted to go to our homes, but would have to leave the area. I wore disposable contacts, which meant I could get by wearing them for 2, maybe 3 days. My eyes were bad. Without contacts or glasses I couldn't see more that 5 inches in front of my face. Even though I didn't want to live in fear, I did live with the knowledge that bad things that I have no control over can happen and because of where I lived a nuclear power plant attack would force me to leave my home. So I started carrying around a bag containing my contacts, glasses, and solutions with me in the trunk of my car, so that if for whatever reason I had to just go, I would be prepared and not be disabled because of my eyes. My family also had 5 dogs. During that time we had to deal with the issue that if something happened we would not be able to go home to save them.

Now perhaps a lawsuit of some sort could be considered appropriate. After all, our government can spend billions of dollars on investigations involving eating food (Don't ask me to explain. It involves a local unit and it is absurd.) so why not give some more to disaster victims. However... $300,000,000,000,000,000?!?!?! $6 billion for each family?!?!?! Katrina was a terrible disaster and afterwards thousands rushed to help those in need. Most Americans consider Katrina to be the worst natural disaster our country has ever faced. But $300,000,000,000,000,000, turns this tragedy into a courtroom circus. I can't imagine how much money this is. How much is a number with 15 zeros behind it? I can't fathom following the universe to the very end anymore than I can fathom this supposed number. This number turns the tragedies and sympathies of these families, into a "That's typical." comment and eyeroll. I don't know how to take this seriously now.

Katrina was a horrible, horrible natural disaster. But if was just that, a natural disaster. Those kinds of things happen all over the world, everyday. Just because you were a victim of one does not give you the right to be greedy. There are people who are victims of murder, rape, abuse and countless of other crimes that will never see the justice they deserve. $6 billion for a natural disaster is not "justice". It is the greed that has taken over our country because people don't want to be responsible for their actions or inaction.

It is not our government's fault that Katrina occurred. It is also not it's fault that those families did not leave their homes in time. Was the aid after the hurricane lacking from our government? I honestly don't know. I do know that when the government was called out for not helping the refugees more quickly, a shortage of money, manpower, and equipment was blamed. If that is the case, then losing $300,000,000,000,000,000.00, is certainly not going to provide more money, manpower, and equipment to the government during the next disaster.

I do realize that those families suffered greatly because of Katrina. I know that they lost everything and they will never get it all back no matter how much money they have. I wish I could do more and that our government could do more to help those families. Even if our government had issued the evacuations sooner and even if those families had left their homes sooner, they still would have lost what they could not have taken with them, which most likely, still would have been a significant amount.

Sometimes life just does not go your way. As a military spouse, I'm all too familiar with that concept. Sometimes, it is no one's fault. Sometimes, it is your own fault. You just have to move on though. Even though that can be really hard, blaming someone else is not going to make it easier in the long run.

My Army Bling!

First of all, Happy New Year!!! I hope everyone's year is off to a good start. And since the last time I posted was before Christmas, I hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas and thinks this has been the best one yet.

Now on to the point of this post...

One of the gifts I was hoping for this Christmas was inspired by Andi at SpouseBuzz in her "I've Got Bling" post. Yes, I too wanted service bling. And when I say bling, I, of course, mean something with some sparkle to it. It doesn't have to blind me, but I like sparkly things.

I perused the site Andi mentioned, but nothing caught my eye. For a while I was at a loss as to how to best bling-up the National Guard. I remembered one necklace I have that I bought, years before I met Stonewall, that I love. The pendants on the necklace are a mini-dog tag and an eagle. The mini-dog tag is the cutest and I still love to wear that necklace. Which got me thinking. Wouldn't a mini-dog tag be good bling? Plus, I can personalize it. Now I was not about to list name, religion, DOB, and SSN on my bling, but I could personalize it with Stonewall's and my names.

I happened to mention this to my mom. My mom, being the awesome mom that she is, searched the internet to find a mini-dog tag with some sparkle. Come Christmas day, under the tree, just for me was my very own Army Bling!!

I don't have a picture of mine, but here is the site she bought it from and she had it personalized with birthstones and names.

Picture courtesy of morgueFile.