|
|
I was hoping you would have the common deceny not to remind me of it. I've
spent 60 years trying to forget it. Arthur Kramer Fact of life in war. I am not sure anyone could or should forget that, even when one relate ones experiences with putting bombs on target, dodging enemy fighters, and flying through flak. There is always another side to war besides the glory and I think we all should keep that in balance. |
ArtKramr wrote:
Based on his testimony befiore congress he may be the most honest man ever to run for public office. You're a sad, sad man. Ed points out several bold faced lies Kerry told and you still ignore it. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam
From: ojunk (Steve Mellenthin) Date: 7/16/2004 11:11 AM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: I was hoping you would have the common deceny not to remind me of it. I've spent 60 years trying to forget it. Arthur Kramer Fact of life in war. I am not sure anyone could or should forget that, even when one relate ones experiences with putting bombs on target, dodging enemy fighters, and flying through flak. There is always another side to war besides the glory and I think we all should keep that in balance. What glory???? Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
"ArtKramr" wrote in message ... I don't think I chastise myself. It is just the persistance of memory. I did what had to be done at the time. And I did it without reservation or regret. But I raised three children. When they were young I would play with them, read them stories give them hugs and kisses as a daddy does. But every now and again as I was doing this I would think of the bomb patterns over Cologne and the smoke and flames rising to 5,000 feet and wonder. And I am still wondering. I guess it is the occupational hazard of all bombardiers. The bombardier on the Enola Gay became a priest in Japan. The bombardier on the Enola Gay, Thomas W. Ferebee, retired from the USAF as a Colonel in 1970. After leaving the Air Force, he worked in real estate in and around Orlando, Florida. He and his wife had four sons. |
From: (ArtKramr)
Date: 7/16/2004 11:19 AM Central Daylight Time Message-id: Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam From: Ed Rasimus Date: 7/16/2004 9:15 AM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: On 16 Jul 2004 16:01:52 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote: Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam From: Ed Rasimus Date: 7/16/2004 8:53 AM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: There is nothing in international law which prohibits the use of .50 cal against personnel. Nothing. I don't think we need the Geneva convention to tell us 50 caliber heavy machine guns used against civilians is wrong. Has old age dimmed your eyes so that you cannot read plain English? Here's the quote again, "I used 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people." It doesn't say "ordered to use against civilians." It says "people". If he were "only following orders" and they said kill civilians with .50 cal, then he was one very sorry excuse for an officer and a leader. You may have read some of the twaddle of your old buddy Walt that recounted Kerry with his M-16, which jammed. So he reached into the boat for another M-16....does that mean he lied in the quote when he says "which were our only weapon." Do you believe he was really leading a Swift boat crew and they only had .50 cal? Which is the truth and which is the lie? If he tells the truth (under oath) in his Senate testimony, then he lies when he claims the heroism for his actions under fire and he lies when he expounds on his honorable service. If his service and courage under fire where honorable, then he lied to the Senate under oath. Can't be both ways. Can I expect another one-liner assertion of the glory of the candidate? Or will you explain what is going on here? Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 Based on his testimony befiore congress he may be the most honest man ever to run for public office. Note that he never accused the Viet Cong of using WMD. Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer Art, give it a rest. In another thread someone made a case that many of the "150 honourably discharged Viet Nam vets" were frauds. For the sake of discussion let's say they aren't. That's 150 out of how many men who saw combat? I put them in the same category as George Lincoln Rockwell who apologized to the Nazis for having fought against them. I was in the Army in Viet Nam and saw nohing approaching the level of approval kerry says the chains of command presented. Did U.S. servicemen commit war crimes without being charged? Yes. Did I see it? No. Did it occur in my AO? Probably not. These things get around. Most of the servicemen in Viet Nam knew something had happened in My Lai before charges were filed. They just didn't know the specifics. The fact remains kerry accused us of all being involved with or have knowledge of war crimes. I know many GIs who told war stories that simply weren't true but were good stories nonetheless. Want to hear the one about the Huey with a broken main rotor blade so they nailed a girl to it for balance and flew home? Art, you are supporting a man who stabbed all of us who served in Viet Nam in the back. If what he said was true he had an obligation to take it public. He not ONCE said the majority of vets served honourably. How would you as a veteran feel if Bob Dole started saying all WW2 vets were either war criminals or did nothing to stope war crimes? Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
|
|
What glory???? The stuff you glamorize in your writings. Maybe that isn't your intent but your writing style sometimes says otherwise. |
|
Sam Byrams wrote:
Okay, just supposing I hit the Powerball and do what any red-blooded American would, i.e. kiss up to Chuckie and cut him a three million dollar check. What do I have to do to get checked out in this beast? Can the average guy with the FAA required minimums, some decent aerobatic experience (not competition) and a willingness to pay attention handle this airplane? If you've got the attitude you can get the altitude. Thousands have. But remember not to exceed 50,000' without a pressure suit. Thousands have. Ooops, I wasn't supposed to say that. -- Jack "Cave ab homine unius libri" |
Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam
From: ojunk (Steve Mellenthin) Date: 7/16/2004 2:30 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: What glory???? The stuff you glamorize in your writings. Maybe that isn't your intent but your writing style sometimes says otherwise. I never glamorised anyything. You just read glamour into it where in fact there was none. The glamour is here on the ground with you. Not in the air with me. Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam
From: (B2431) Date: 7/16/2004 2:18 PM Pacific Standard Time How would you as a veteran feel if Bob Dole started saying all WW2 vets were either war criminals or did nothing to stope war crimes? Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired Dole has that right under the 1st. amendment. I am secure and comfortable with my experiences no matter what anyone says. But millions of Americans agreed with Kerry, were against the war and still are to this day. Kerry was not alone in his thoughts or statements. And for someone who has been stabbed in the back you seem in very good health. Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
In article , Sam
Byrams wrote: Okay, just supposing I hit the Powerball and do what any red-blooded American would,i.e. kiss up to Chuckie and cut him a three million dollar check. What do I have to do to get checked out in this beast? Can the average guy with the FAA required minimums,some decent aerobatic experience (not competition) and a willingness to pay attention handle this airplane? You can take lessons in an L-39. It will cost some bucks, but you don't have to hit the powerball to do it. -john- -- ================================================== ================== John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708 Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com ================================================== ================== |
Okay, just supposing I hit the Powerball and do what any red-blooded
American would,i.e. kiss up to Chuckie and cut him a three million dollar check. I'm not sure who Chuckie is, but there are a few civilian owned T-38s. I'm not sure how much you would have to throw down to pry it away from the current owners though? Additionaly, you better hit the lottery for much more than the cost of the Talon because its going to cost quite a bit to fly and maintain it. What do I have to do to get checked out in this beast? To fly it VFR all you need is a multi-engine (centerline thrust) rating....I think? Can the average guy with the FAA required minimums,some decent aerobatic experience (not competition) and a willingness to pay attention handle this airplane? I'd get lessons from Ed or some other former IP. While I found the aircraft easy to fly, it could kill you if you don't have "UPT quality" training, particularly in the landing phase. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
Lately the Feds are really frowning on the T-38.......dunno why, as they are
not bothering the Mig-21 crowd too much. Something to do with ex-US military possibly. VL |
|
|
|
"Steven P. McNicoll" ) writes:
"Bill Shatzer" wrote in message ... Assumed but not proven. In any case irrelevant if the folks -thought- they were in a battle. Kerry's crew said there was no enemy fire, so the folks didn't think they were in a battle. No, that's not correct at all. His former commander (one echelon removed) now claims that's what they said. The crew currently claim no such thing. With one exception, -everyone- who served under Kerry on the Swift boats speaks most highly of him and NONE claim it was anything but a battle. Or, at least an assumed battle. You think those folks in the Bradley who got zapped by a blue on blue Maverick didn't get PHs? There was no -real- battle, they were just motoring along when the A-10 mistook them for a T-72 or whatever. The A-10 driver -thought- it was a battle. Irrelevant. Quite relevant. "Purported" experience. The things have to cover a minimum distance before they arm themselves and that distance is sufficient to place the shooter outside of the blast/shrapnel radius. I recall one story from the vietnam conflict where an army surgeon got written up for removing an unexploded M-79 round from an ARVN trooper. -He- got shot by friendly fire but the round hadn't traveled far enough to arm itself. Based on the best information, Kerry was not entitled to that award. Based on the best information, there is no way he could put shrapnel into himself from his own M-79 round. The damn things just don't work that way. Based upon the best information, he was fully entitled to his Purple Heart. -- "Cave ab homine unius libri" |
(B2431) wrote in
: [snip] One of the men from Doolittle's raid who survived Japanese captivity went back to Japan as a missionary. Which comes from an entirely different point of view than the Enola gay crew. IBM __________________________________________________ _____________________________ Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com The Worlds Uncensored News Source |
Steve Mellenthin ) writes:
-snip- Speaking out against a war takes courage but doing so in a way that encourages the enemy, raises the level of danger to the men still in the line of fire, and denigrates the service record of those who have served is not an act of courage, it is an act of self serving political gratuity. How would you suggest that might be done? Just how would one speak out against the war while simultaneously not encouraging the enemy? Speaking, but doing so so quietly that no one hears? And the best way to reduce the danger level to those still in the line of fire was to get them out of the line of fire as quickly as possible. Especially as the VN conflict was not going to be "won" in any meaningful sense. -- "Cave ab homine unius libri" |
Regnirps wrote:
Did you ever see anyone come back with a glove caught in the canopy? Nope. Especially not from 50,000'. ; 4 PSI isn't much, but it's all you've got. Jack |
Regnirps wrote:
They had an automatic landing system. They had ILS, if that's what you mean, but no autopilot. Jack |
There was one in TAP for about a year for one million, and with hot ejection
seats. I think that was the one I used to see in the hangar in Wichita Falls (SPS). It was blue, and I think one of the ENJJPT IPs was instructing the owner it it. Ron PA-31T Cheyenne II Maharashtra Weather Modification Program Pune, India |
One of the men from Doolittle's raid who survived Japanese captivity went
back to Japan as a missionary. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired And one of the Japanese participants in Pearl Harbor later became a protestant minister in the US. Ron PA-31T Cheyenne II Maharashtra Weather Modification Program Pune, India |
Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam
From: (Regnirps) Date: 7/16/2004 10:18 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: (ArtKramr) wrote: I don't think we need the Geneva convention to tell us 50 caliber heavy machine guns used against civilians is wrong. Depends on what they are doing at the time. What about a lynch mob after you? -- Charlie Springer Excellant point. 50's for everybody. Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
Steve Mellenthin ) writes:
-snip- Speaking out against a war takes courage but doing so in a way that encourages the enemy, raises the level of danger to the men still in the line of fire, and denigrates the service record of those who have served is not an act of courage, it is an act of self serving political gratuity. How would you suggest that might be done? Just how would one speak out against the war while simultaneously not encouraging the enemy? Speaking, but doing so so quietly that no one hears? Certainly not by hanging out with peple who allow themselves to be photgraphed sitting in a piece of AAA that was probably used agaist our forces within 12 hours. And not by making comments about how Americans are committing atrocities in the combat zone, or hurling ones medals at the government only to claim later it was staged. One can disagree or speak out without speaking badly of the people who are still serving and honorably following orders. Would you rather have the military pick and choose their conflicts or follow the orders of the Commander-in-Chief. And the best way to reduce the danger level to those still in the line of fire was to get them out of the line of fire as quickly as possible. Especially as the VN conflict was not going to be "won" in any meaningful sense. -- That had been happening since 1971 and by 72 the only major combat troops were air units blunting the North Vietnamese offensive into the south so it is hard for me personally to see that JFK's actions weren't more for personal political gain than opposition to the was. Just my opinion. |
|
"Regnirps" wrote in message ... | | | I'm pretty sure there was a system in the T-38's where you could throw the | panic switch on approah and it did the rest -- provided you met certain | constraints about being lined up right. | | -- Charlie Springer | ....and it's got a convenient yellow handle between the pilot's knees. ;-) Cheers Dave Kearton |
|
Regnirps wrote:
I'm pretty sure there was a system in the T-38's where you could throw the panic switch on approah and it did the rest -- provided you met certain constraints about being lined up right. There is no such system on any T-38, including the new C models with glass cockpit. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
Dave Kearton wrote:
...and it's got a convenient yellow handle between the pilot's knees. ;-) Actually, the handles are outside your legs. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
-snip-
Speaking out against a war takes courage but doing so in a way that encourages the enemy, raises the level of danger to the men still in the line of fire, and denigrates the service record of those who have served is not an act of courage, it is an act of self serving political gratuity. How would you suggest that might be done? Just how would one speak out against the war while simultaneously not encouraging the enemy? Speaking, but doing so so quietly that no one hears? Certainly not by hanging out with peple who allow themselves to be photgraphe sitting in a piece of AAA that was probably used agaist our forces within 12 hours. If you're speaking of "Hanoi Jane", it should be noted that Fonda's North Vietnam visit came -after- the Kerry photo and, indeed, after Kerry had broken with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. It would seem a bit much to expect him to make an accurate prediction of her -future- actions. And not by making comments about how Americans are committing atrocities in the combat zone, Is there any doubt at all that Americans were committing some atrocities - or at least some pretty bad things - in the combat zone? What is the appropriate moral response when one has evidence of such things? Indeed, what is the appropriate patriotic response when one has evidence of such things? Somehow, being a good German doesn't seem the correct response. or hurling ones medals at the government only to claim later it was staged. My goodness! Whoever claimed -other- than that it was "staged". It was a demonstration and a photo-op for gawd sakes. Everything was "staged" in the sense that it was organized and choreographed in advance. One can disagree or speak out without speaking badly of the people who are still serving and honorably following orders. He was, as you correctly noted, speaking against "atrocities", not folks "honorably following orders". Would you rather have the military pick and choose their conflicts or follow the orders of the Commander-in-Chief. He was no longer in the military and was free to exercise his first amendment priveleges. And, clearly, he felt that the CinC had choosen the WRONG conflict. And the best way to reduce the danger level to those still in the line of fire was to get them out of the line of fire as quickly as possible. Especially as the VN conflict was not going to be "won" in any meaningful sense. That had been happening since 1971 and by 72 the only major combat troops wer air units blunting the North Vietnamese offensive into the south Wasn't that just about the time Dewey Canyon II and Lam Son 719 were ongoing? And the notorious Cambodian invasion was but nine or ten months in the past? US forces had been largely, though not entirely, withdrawn from aggressive search and destroy ground missions by mid-71 but there were a lot of aviation companies, artillery units, engineering battalions, and the like still providing active combat support to the ARVN units. And lots of PBI-types still taking significant casualties. Certainly to claim that the "only major combat troops were air units" overstates the case by quite a bit. so it is hard for me personally to see that JFK's actions weren't more for personal political gain than opposition to the was. Just my opinion. Well, perhaps. But certainly the more useful tact for a decorated war hero to take were he concerned about politics would NOT have been active opposition to the war. You can certainly raise more campaign contributions at the local VFW hall than at any number of VVAW rallies populated by folks in tie-dye and wearing beads. Kerry's views may have been mistaken - though, in retrospect, it seems he was more correct than not about the war - but I see no indication that they were anything other than honestly held beliefs. -- "Cave ab homine unius libri" |
If you're speaking of "Hanoi Jane", it should be noted that Fonda's
North Vietnam visit came -after- the Kerry photo and, indeed, after Kerry had broken with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. It would seem a bit much to expect him to make an accurate prediction of her -future- actions. You are reinforcing an oft held belief of at least half the holds, judging by the polls, that he feels strongly both ways on most every issue. And not by making comments about how Americans are committing atrocities in the combat zone, Is there any doubt at all that Americans were committing some atrocities - or at least some pretty bad things - in the combat zone? That is an awfully strange remark. War is a pretty bad thing. Just as many atrocities are committed on the streets of the US every day. I don't see the relevance of your comment. My point was that Kerry was way off base accusing everyone who ever served in Vietnam of committing them. As one of those who served honorably in combat, I take major offense at his remark. What is the appropriate moral response when one has evidence of such things? Indeed, what is the appropriate patriotic response when one has evidence of such things? Somehow, being a good German doesn't seem the correct response. or hurling ones medals at the government only to claim later it was staged. My goodness! Whoever claimed -other- than that it was "staged" He did. He, or one of his aides later said those weren't his when asked why those medals he through over the White House fence were back on his office wall. .. It was a demonstration and a photo-op for gawd sakes. Everything was "staged" in the sense that it was organized and choreographed in advance. Call it what you want, it was bad judgement for someone in his position, especially, as you say, he later dissociated himslef with the VVAW. One can disagree or speak out without speaking badly of the people who are still serving and honorably following orders. He was, as you correctly noted, speaking against "atrocities", not folks "honorably following orders". That sure isn't what he said. He didn't differentiate between those committing atrocities and those who followed orders. Would you rather have the military pick and choose their conflicts or follow the orders of the Commander-in-Chief. He was no longer in the military and was free to exercise his first amendment priveleges. And, clearly, he felt that the CinC had choosen the WRONG conflict. I don't debate that point and I support his right to do so. The movement at the time was as much agains the people following orders as it was their leadership and people like Fonda and Kerry were inciting acts of abuse against those who served honorably. Talk to anyone in uniform who passed through San Francison International in uniform in the late 60s and early 70s.. And the best way to reduce the danger level to those still in the line of fire was to get them out of the line of fire as quickly as possible. Especially as the VN conflict was not going to be "won" in any meaningful sense. That had been happening since 1971 and by 72 the only major combat troops wer air units blunting the North Vietnamese offensive into the south Wasn't that just about the time Dewey Canyon II and Lam Son 719 were ongoing? And the notorious Cambodian invasion was but nine or ten months in the past? The only thing notorious about the Cambodian invasion was the way the press handled it. We invaded an unihabited area of Cambodia to try to cut supply lines to the south. The press played it up like it was equal to the Soviet invasiopn of Hungary in the 50s. At that stage in the war we were winding down our efforts and attempting to put the SVN government where it could defend itself. The Viet Cong was essentially defeated as a fighting force and and the NVN forces were building up prepatory to an invasion of the south. US forces had been largely, though not entirely, withdrawn from aggressive search and destroy ground missions by mid-71 but there were a lot of aviation companies, artillery units, engineering battalions, and the like still providing active combat support to the ARVN units. And lots of PBI-types still taking significant casualties. Certainly to claim that the "only major combat troops were air units" overstates the case by quite a bit. I don't disagree at all. We were withdrawing in a manner so as to allow the SVN a menas to defend itself agains NVN agression. A year later most had departed except for support and liaison forces. so it is hard for me personally to see that JFK's actions weren't more for personal political gain than opposition to the was. Just my opinion. Well, perhaps. But certainly the more useful tact for a decorated war hero to take were he concerned about politics would NOT have been active opposition to the war. You can certainly raise more campaign contributions at the local VFW hall than at any number of VVAW rallies populated by folks in tie-dye and wearing beads. Kerry's views may have been mistaken - though, in retrospect, it seems he was more correct than not about the war - but I see no indication that they were anything other than honestly held beliefs. I accept that as a possibilitybut is is hard for me to escape the sense that he used his position in the anti war effort as a springboard for his fledgling political career. And it is hard for me to understand how one could be ashamed enough of his service and his heriosm to call his actions atrocities and return his medals only to later give them a place of honor on his I love me wall. To change one's mind like that is impossible for me to understand. I speak as one who served 24 months in combat. Steve |
"Bill Shatzer" wrote
Kerry's views may have been mistaken - though, in retrospect, it seems he was more correct than not about the war - but I see no indication that they were anything other than honestly held beliefs. He didn't even write the "baby killer" speech before Congress. Nice try Fluffy... |
"Steve Mellenthin" wrote
I accept that as a possibilitybut is is hard for me to escape the sense that he used his position in the anti war effort as a springboard for his fledgling political career. No **** Sherlock. He didn't even write the speech before Congress. |
|
"Brooks Gregory" wrote in message ...
"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message ... On 15 Jul 2004 20:57:04 -0700, (Fred the Red Shirt) wrote: Can you show that Kerry, ever LITERALLY accused every soldier in Vietnam of committing war crimes? Are you the only person allowed to use analogies. -- Let me introduce you to John Kerry: Thank you. http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/ Actually, that site appears to be run by an opposition group. They seem to be both anti-Kerry and anti-McCain. The rest of the site has a lot of accusations against both but evidence to support those ac- cusations is conspicuous by its absence. http://www.pow-miafamilies.org/ Nothing about Kerry on that page. http://www.jpac.pacom.mil/ Nothing about Kerry on that page. http://www.aiipowmia.com/ssc/ssctest.html Nothing about Kerry on that page. http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php That link seems to mostly be about Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW). Here and there one finds soem rather wild accusations against Kerry, but no evidence to support them. The do have a link to some exerps from the winter soldier campaign 'testimony' (quotes becasue it was not a legal proceding) upon which much of Kerry's famous speach to the US Congress was based. There is a link called _debunking_ that leads to a page with sowmwhat disorganized claims that some of the 'testimony' of the winter soldier campaign had been debunked. But the person's whos testimony was supposedly disproved are not named. Dewey Canyon III is named but for what purpose is a mystery. The (anonymous) author(s) of that page claim that the VVAW used fake witnesses, but do not name a single example. If we follow the link 'key points' we find thirteen paragraphs: First: In his April 1971 speech to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, John Kerry claimed that war crimes committed by the American military against Vietnamese civilians were "not isolated incidents, but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis..." War crimes in Vietnam were actually quite rare. Yet the author(s) of that page offer no evidence in support of this 'key point'. Second: Kerry claimed that war crimes were being committed "with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command." In fact, military personnel were warned that "if you disobey the rules of engagement, you can be tried and punished." War crimes were never a matter of policy, and were prosecuted when discovered Yet the author(s) of that page offer no evidence in support of this 'key point'. And so on. Wherea Kerry had the 'testimony' of the Winter Soldier project to support his own testimony befor Congress the author(s) of this page present no evidence at all to support their 'key point'. But don't trust me. See for yourself. See also: http://lists.village.virginia.edu/si.../WS_entry.html -- FF |
Buzzer ) writes:
On 18 Jul 2004 21:58:24 GMT, (Bill Shatzer) wrote: He was no longer in the military and was free to exercise his first amendment priveleges. And, clearly, he felt that the CinC had choosen the WRONG conflict. Wasn't he still a commissioned officer and out of uniform besides when he testified? Not so far as I know. He may have still been a name on a list in the inactive reserve or whatever they called it then but he was no longer in an active duty or in the ready reserve. It would have been inappropriate and probably illegal for him to have appeared in uniform. Seems a few officers are not happy campers after being recalled for Iraq after "they were no longer in the military." Rules change if one is activated - assuming he was still eligible of activation. Until that happens however, one is essentially a civilian. Certainly he was not subject to the UCMJ. -- "Cave ab homine unius libri" |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:57 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
AviationBanter.com