On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 02:23:11 -0500, "Lawrence Dillard"
wrote:

Published February 11, 2004

'Bush and I were lieutenants'
George Bush and I were lieutenants and pilots in the 111th Fighter
Interceptor Squadron (FIS), Texas Air National Guard (ANG) from 1970 to
1971.
SNIP

Not quite; as the Colonel relates below, he "stayed the course" of the
Guard's transition, whereas GWB did not.

The colonel remained in the Guard. That was a choice not an
obligation. GWB, was honorably released from the Guard. That was a
choice not an obligation.

With respect, the ANGs of that time mostly bore no resemblance to today's
ANG's, especially in terms of preparation, and in integration with active
service components; I find it a bit disingenuous of GWB to try to link his
service in an air-defense cadre, which was highly unlikely to be called to
serve in Viet Nam, with those men and women who have served in the Guards in
the years since the ending of the Cold War.

Excuse me son, but ANG units deployed regularly to SEA throughout the
conflict. In fact, at the time that GWB entered Guard service, there
were F-102 units deployed operationally in Vietnam and Thailand.
Several F-102s were lost during the war. Other ANG units experience
combat (and losses) in other aircraft types.

They were right about that, certainly. But furthrmore, it made sense only to
call up units likely to be able to play a role in the fighting.

There were only two aircraft types in the entire USAF that were not
operated in SEA, the F-106 and the B-58. Every other aircraft in the
inventory was "able to play a role in the fighting."

GWB's being excused from service, it has been claimed, had not to do either
with career obligations or with career conflicts. It apparently is part and
parcel of persistent claims/rumors that GWB was arrested on a charge of
cocaine posession in his home state (during 1972); however, his "record" on
this issue has allegedly been expunged due to the intervention of an elected
Texas judge who owed the Bush family a favor. In any event, while GWB's
enlistment was originally intended to end on a May 26, 1974 date of
separation, (per the National Guard Bureau, Arlington, VA), in fact, his
separation was Nov. 21, 1974 (per the headquartrs, Air Reserve Personnel
Center, Denver, CO).

By late 1970, the USAF and USN were drawing down training requirements
for aircrews significantly. Production of pilots and navs for AF was
reduced from more than 5000/year to around 3000. (I was the director
of Air Training Command undergrad flying training assignments at the
time.) Releases from service commitments in '72-'74 were common.

The USN training program at Pensacola in late '71 had a blood-letting
in which 400 trainees were released from pilot training, some of them
within two weeks of graduation and receipt of their wings.

What makes things look bad or GWB is that after undergoing the requisite
flight training for an air-defense mission, he opted out of flying (or was
involuntarily grounded by Texas Air National Guard) by failing to take the
required annual flight physical; this physical, for the first time, included
drug-testing. GWB has acknowledged that he worked with Houston-based Project
PULL during 1972, leading to suggestions that this was in fact a "sentence"
to community service in relation to his arrest/expungement.

First, note that UPT takes more than a year. Survival, operational
training and unit check takes another year. During that entire time,
you are on full time active duty and every time you kick the tires and
light the fire in a single-engine, single-seat Century Series jet, it
can kill you--all by itself without help from an enemy.

Note also that public service and volunteerism is a prerequisite for
public office. Virtually everyone seeking a career either in high
level executive jobs or elective office will volunteer. GWB's service
with Project PULL tells you nothing beyond that.

Our President appears to have been assigned to to ARPC (which served, among
other things, as a disciplinary unit), out of Denver, CO. Members of the NG
are assigned there, for among other reasons, disciplinary reasons. Could GWB
have had dual contemporaneous assignments? O r was he doing something else
entirely? As I understand it, ARPC-time was/is not counted by TANG toward
required duty. Hence, the separation date given by ARPC is approximately six
months' later than that given by NGB.

Gimme a break. Every base I served on in 23 years of military tactical
aviation had a corrections facility. That doesn't mean I was
imprisoned. ARPC is primarily a PERSONNEL headquarters. It is a huge
office complex. That's its job.

Problem is, for those of us who are trying to determine whether we should
continue to support the President, that for whatever reason, Lt Bush never
took his required physical exam, scheduling conflict or otherwise
notwithstanding. The ANGs appear to have instituted drug-testing prior to
the time such was done in the active USAF.

That physical was 1972. Mandatory drug testing was instituted in '74.


Some have suggested that GWB's records have been redacted, since about 1973.
ARPC does serve as the repository for the paper regarding transfers to
inactive reserve status, such as GWB, for retirements, and for disciplinary
measures; presumably, "discipline" can encompass infractions outside of the
service as well as inside.

Some have "suggested" that drawing conclusions on what might be and
what could have happened is the exercise of spin doctors.

During the Colonel's tenure in the Guard, there was a collective sea-change
in the ambit of responsibilities and in the seriousness of its preparation
and readiness for active service. The Colonel was perhaps lucky in being
able to stay the course and experience those changes. What some find
troublesome is that GWB suggests that his service was directly comparable to
today's N-Guardsmens', which clearly it was not. (Nor apparently, was it
equivalent to the Colonel's, as the Colonel demonstrates that he took his
own role seriously and served through thick and thin). In that case, who
slanders whom? Is it appropriate for our President to wrap his service in
the same mantle as that of comtemporary, dedicated guardsmen who have been
called to active duty, if his own service was not in most ways comparable?

Show me someone who has survived the training environment of UPT
(where I was an instructor for 4 years), who has handled the multiple
survival courses required of an aircrew (which I am familiar with),
who has qualified in a Century Series SE/SS fighter and performed
operationally, even without combat, and they will have my respect.

SNIP remainder

IMHO, President Bush should refute his critics, which he can do by
explaining convincingly about the overlapping timing of his grounding from
aviation duties--i.e., why he faied to take his physical--, his assignment
to APRC (discipline unit--why so?--), his community service commitment in
Houston (again, why so?--); and the six months' discontinuity between dates
of separation from his duties listed by the NGB and the ARPC. One need not
be a desperate left-winger to want to have clear answers. After all, our
(informed?) votes in nine months will determine whether he will have a
second term.

You seek more to distribute innuendo and suggestion than really to
seek answers. The Guard Colonel who knows what he's talking about
provided you with answers. I've just provided you with answers. Will
you believe any of them?





Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8