"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ...
...
Bush was not guilty of being AWOL. In the Guard there are provisions for
individuals to perform "split training" and "equivalent training"
assemblies, before or after the scheduled drills, when they can't reasonably
attend the scheduled events. Based upon the NYT investiagtion results, that
is what GWB did--he was not the first, and he will not be the last, to
perform a portion of his duty in such a fashion.

I've never seen copies of the documents allegedly obtained by the
NYT. Have they been posted online?

Hopefully this will eventually settle the matter:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...litary_records

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Feb9.html

This document has been cited as evidence of poor attendence, but it
certainly is not clear to me.

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc23.gif


... or (b) they volunteered for
active duty (just as Bush had volunteered for Palace Alert duty, which could
have found him serving in SEA had he been accepted).

Somewhere I have seen a copy of a document in which GWB had expressed
a preference to not be assigned ot overseas duty. But I wasn't able
to find it just now.

This is the first that I heard of 'Palace ALert Duty' or that Bush
had volunteered for duty outside of the US. Can you offer some
evidence in support of that, explain 'Palace Alert Duty'?

Was PAD related to the SAC in any way?




... This was at a time
when the Marines were so hard pressed for pilots that they
had to send men to Army and Air Force Flight Schools.

It seems to me that if the Marines had to send pilots to the
Army and AF for training then the Marines must have had a SURPLUS
of pilots (e.g. too many to for the USMC to train on its own)
rather than being hard pressed for them.


Hmmm...one wonders why those same archaic fighters were sent to Thailand and
Vietnam throughout the major part of the war, and as we have already seen in
another thread, why a couple of them were lost in combat operations.


If indeed they were archaic that does help to explain why some
were lost in combat, does it not?

--

FF