Pleading for help - trying to save Charlie's life!

[RoseyReps]

There is already a plethora of dogs in need of homes here in the US. Why bring another one here?
As heartless as it may be; I think that if people would stop rescuing stray dogs and cats, spaying/neutering the pet ones and euthanizing the shelter animals, the problems with them here would get better. It burns my butt when Craigslist zealots flag posts of people trying to find new homes for a pet they can no longer keep, but yet they keep up all the "rescue" ones. What the heck really? How is one animal in need of a home any better than another’s?

I'm not trying to be rude, just trying to clarify what you are suggesting. You think people should stop rescuing strays, spay/neuter the pets already owned, and then euthanize shelter animals? If this is the way you think it should be (and excuse me if I messed that up), how can you then say "How is one animal in need of a home any better than another?" What is the problem with rescuing strays? Or giving the shelter dogs a second chance rather than euthanizing them? How can you say in one sentence, why bring another one home, we have plenty...and then in another say no dog's life is greater than another? What makes that shelter dog, or rescue dog, or whatever, any more worthy of saving than Charlie? Because they're already here? That dog has obviously made it into many of the men's hearts, who are we to say they are wrong for wanting to save it? If they can get the funds together, more power to them.

I agree that the CL zealots are idiots though. And I apologize if I misinterpreted any of your post. Just trying to wrap my head around that correctly.

[TessadasExotics]

Yes. I think that feral dogs and cats should be euthanized. I don't like shelter animals being "rescued" just because they are on death row. Adopting a pet for ones own self or family and rescuing an animal to foster it, or to place it in foster, is completely different. If you want a pet and choose to get one at a shelter, by all means do it. I am all for that. What I don't like is someone "rescuing" said animal only because it's going to be put down, just to turn around and rehome it. So many of the animals in shelters are repeat tenants. I have seen dogs that have been "rescued" and then returned several times. This is not fair and I think the animal is better off euthanized.
If you have no plans on breeding a pet dog or cat, or if you let them roam free, then yes I think that by law you should have to spay/neuter them. Not only does it keep the stray population down but it lengthens their life span.

As far as the dogs/cats in Iraq/Afghanistan goes. There is a lawful command that is in place that says that no soldier can keep or care for a wild animal.MOD 10 of the CENTCOM Individual Protection and Individual/Unit Deployment Policy, states that local animals are carriers of multiple diseases, to include rabies, and that deployed personnel will avoid contact with local animals and are not to feed, adopt or interact with them in any way.
Subordinate commanders have issued feral animal policies that reinforce this policy. Afghanistan Policy Letter 25, Feral Animal Control on FOBs/COBs, provides guidance to all personnel assigned to U.S. Forces in Afghanistan and directs commanders at all levels to enforce General Order 1B, which prohibits adoption of pets and mascots, implements animal control practices, requires proper procedures to prevent animal access to sources of food waste, and forbids compassionate feeding of animals in the deployed environment.

[carlson]

Ok I understand where your coming from with the rules in play but I'll get to that. As far as spaying and neutering yes I say that should be done there is a bad feral cat problem where I live because people don't know how to keep track of an animal and feel cats should be aloud to roam blocks away from their houses with no issues, that's another huge pet peeve of mine but off track, spay and neutering yes if you don't plain on breeding it should be done. Then the shelter animals now this is the one that I struggle with personally, when I was looking for my first I'm an adult now dog I knew I wanted it to be a rescued pit bull, and the pounds are full of them I found my girl at an event we have around here to pair adoption places up with people looking for dogs and I found my girl, she's a rescued fighting dog that at the time I found her was missing a few patches of hair had become over weight at the pound and was scared of the world around her and just needed someone to take her and take her and give her some love so I did so I can't say I think that all shelter animals should be put down but I will give you an animal that has no chance of being re-homed, be that dogs that bite people or that can't be in the same area as another animal with out killing it, or in the case of a feral animal, but not just because their takin up space if they have a chance at a new home give them some time to find it. Maybe a better screening system in place for people taking the animals or something along that lines to help prevent the saving and flipping of an animal. Ok and back to the rules in place saying the military can't do whatever with animals they find (sorry not in the military have friends and family that are so anything I say comes from stories from them.) well my big question is how many bases are actually in forcing this rule because Bruce's story isn't the first story like this I've heard where a group of soldiers find a dog and it becomes like a pet to them. My cousin in the Air Force has a story about a cat(I believe that's what it was) that called their dorms home and the guys living there took care of the cat and slept with it. Hell an old dude from the nursing home I work at served over in WW2 got started breeding dogs because of a dog he had (and brought home) over there. But to be fair in the WW2 guy that was an American trained dog used to run messages I think cuz it sounded like the dog went over their with their group and he was one of the main care givers. So my point of my rambling is it happens its human nature to care for something that in return shows loyalty or compassion back specially when the other locals aren't to thrilled to see you. Sorry if this sounds kind of rambling like doing this on a phone isn't easy. But Bruce I hope your able to get this guy home so one of your group can keep him (is he going to you or one of the other guys?) if I wasn't scraping the bottom as of late I'd help out but I'm here as support an sending good vibes. Ok book done sorry anyone who read this far

[OsirisRa32]

Holy Wall of Text Batman!! lol

[carlson]

Holy Wall of Text Batman!! lol

Sorry 😳 I seen all the other long posts lol

[gsarchie]

This is why soldiers are NOT supposed to care for/take in wild animals while deployed.

What do you mean by "this?"

I am not saying that I play with Charlie, although I will say that many younger soldiers here do. Since you are obviously familiar with a deployment evironment, you know that the reason that people shoot the dogs is because they CAN carry disease, but that no testing is ever done and that the dogs are shot as a precautionary measure. Charlie will be given all required vaccinations and will have to undergo a quaratine period before being released to me back in the States. Your stories of catching animals sounds like BS to me, as I have never seen anyone, aside from myself, move a camel spider or scorpion to spare it from someone's boot. YOU may have done this, but I imagine that your comrades were bystanders and didn't actually help. Also, you doing this violated GO 1B, so you have no room to talk.

Finally, one dog at a pound being humanely put down will have no impact on humans, save from the individual that did the euthanization. If Charlie, who is loved by everyone on this FOB, were to be shot in the head, it would have a great effect on over 100 people. I'm not saying that one dog's life is worth more than that of another, but I am helping Charlie because he just so happens to be a dog that I know and love. I'm sorry that my reasons for wanting to give him a better life where he won't either be shot in the head or given to a family of Afhgans, who wouldn't care for him like I would and where kids would kick him and throw rocks at him, isn't acceptable to you - oh wait, no I'm not.

Also, thanks for letting me know what the UCMJ is. Just curious - are you still in and what rank are you/were you when you got out? Just personal curiousity is all.



To everyone that has shown support, thank you. I am not sure if I will be able to get this done or not but I am going to try. I will be holding on to Charlie until one of the Navy Seals out here gets home and can come and get him. Charlie was playing with the Seal at one point when he was younger and while chewing his hand acccidentally broke skin, which caused the Seal to have to go and get a series of rabbies vaccinations as a precautonary measure since Charlie has never been vaccinated. The Seal is fine and DID NOT contract any diseases through Charlies saliva, so that is a good sign.

[eatgoodfood]

I honestly think all of this is crazy, lol. I know soldiers are not "supposed" to keep animals, but hell we sure did. We even bought a couple puppies off the locals and kept them on our cop. We also had a few stray cats that lived there too. And this was a tiny little outpost in the city. We did have to kill a couple of the dogs because they got really sick, none of us got sick from them, could we have yea I suppose. We also had a dog that would follow us out on missions everywhere and chase off other dogs and little kids. He wound up getting in a fight with another dog and we had to put him down. I think its cool that the OP wants to save this dog, but I also agree that there are plenty of awesome dogs in the states that need homes, and why should we bring more.

[rlditmars]

Folks,
I think Bruce made a very simple plea. He was completely forthcoming and open about his motivation and stated his needs. But the request itself was more of a Yes or No type of request. If you can help, then help. If you can't, shouldn't, or won't, then don't. But I don't feel there is much need for opinion on this matter.

However, if an opinion is what you need, here is mine. As a person who has dedicated himself to preserving our freedom, I believe he has earned the right (Bruce would say "privilege") to be spared your criticisms about the task at hand. Let it be your "Thank You" for his service if you will. And for those of you will now direct your ire towards me for fighting his battle, I am OK with that, as Bruce has fought mine.

[ballpythonluvr]

I for one am willing to help. As was stated, Bruce is serving his country and I don't think that what he has proposed here is so bad. Thank you for your service my friend. Let me know how I can help because I don't do Facebook anymore.

[wolfy-hound]

I totally understand why the policy is in force. I also know that it's not always enforced. I think the fact that the official rule says "wild animal" means they can argue a loophole. A dog that is acting as a pet is not a wild animal. It's a domesticated breed. It's like stating you've got to shoot every goat or chicken that pops up because they are "wild animals". They aren't.

The intent is to keep soldiers safe and to prevent US resources going to support feral animals and to prevent camps from being overrun with dogs/cats/truly wild species. That would bring fleas and ticks and yes, diseases to the soldiers.

While I myself think that $5000 would be better spent on 500 dogs here that already need help, who am I to say that Charlie doesn't deserve to live a good life? That would be like someone saying that a person who takes their valued BP to a vet and has to spend $500 should just forget the stupid snake and spend that $500 helping the poor shelter animals instead.

If you can raise the money needed, I hope Charlie is healthy enough to pass quarantine and makes it to a good home. And you are indeed correct, killing a dog who's become a mascot/pet to a bunch of soldiers is going to kill morale. Folks serving their country really don't deserve that.