How
dare we expect these betrodden souls to fund their own educational attainment while on active duty?
Now they only receive free housing, free food and clothing, free healthcare for themselves and their families, free matching contributions for their retirement accounts, discounted life insurance, significant tax benefits, almost the same total compensation as many comparable jobs in the private sector ('comparable' to what persons with similar educational attainment and experience are making in the private sector, to be exact), significant prestige and an invaluable resume item easily parlayable into future employment, and a maximum of at least $45.5K towards further education as a result of the post-9/11 GI Bill (36 months of benefits at $17.5K per year for tuition, $1k per year for books + an indeterminately large housing stipend which varies based on zip code).
Only! The goverment should keep it's promises. If they are going to change things, then they need to do it to new recruits. Don't fuck over the people that you promised certain benefits to.
Since the military is an AVF, there is some onus on those who agree to join to understand what they are and are not entitled to. Ask your friend to point to the part of the contract she signed indicating that the military is obligated to provide her tuition assistance.
Even if there is such a clause, the onus is on your friend to determine the status of military contracts, viz., their susceptibility to revisal. I'm not in the military and it took me 20 seconds to type into my fancy computer internet device-a-majig "sample military contract," which in turn generated a series of websites. Several of them describe the clause of the contract which states:
"Laws and regulations that govern military personnel may change without notice to me. Such changes may affect my status, pay allowances, benefits and responsibilities as a member of the Armed Forces REGARDLESS of the provisions of this enlistment/re-enlistment document.”
Thus, virtually all elements of the contract are subject to revisal as the military deems appropriate. I don't think I'm being unreasonable in expecting people who agree in principle to kill purported enemies of the USG in far away lands of tangential or dubious relevance to the citizenry's security to understand the nature of their contracts. Tell your friend of this so that she might be better informed in the future -- she sounds embarrassingly naive.