If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"B2431" wrote in message ... From: "PAW" Date: 8/25/2004 1:22 AM Central Daylight Time Message-id: "B2431" wrote in message ... From: osite (RobertR237) Date: 8/23/2004 8:51 PM Central Daylight Time Message-id: From: " jls" Date: 8/23/2004 7:10 AM Central Daylight Time Message-id: http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that time frame let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year commitment. The authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18 and over had a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious objector, medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in the Army and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive reserves before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either Guard, active or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve. The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and enlisteds. As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon retirement. Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling proves absoultely nothing. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush. Bob Reed I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired Any of you guys recall NG's with 4 year active reserve commitments in the late 60's, early 70's? I don't. Every single NG I knew was on 6 year ACTIVE reserve status. I'm sure many of them would have enjoyed getting cut loose early too. Phil The commitment was a total of 6 years. I know people who did Guard fo 6 years and and some who did 4 years. Never having done Guard I'm not sure how they did it. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired Nobody (other than GW Bush) went through flightschool (during that time period) with a 4 year NG commitment. I served my time, why couldn't Bush serve his? Why couldn't he maintain flight status? We know he likes to fly.... at least out to aircraft carriers playing pilot dressup. Gw's commitment was for 6 years of ACTIVE TANG and he didn't finish it. In the meantime, men were being drafted and sent to war. Dan, were you in the service prior to 75? Phil |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon retirement. Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling proves absoultely nothing. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush. Bob Reed I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired Any of you guys recall NG's with 4 year active reserve commitments in the late 60's, early 70's? I don't. Every single NG I knew was on 6 year ACTIVE reserve status. I'm sure many of them would have enjoyed getting cut loose early too. Phil I seem to remember something along that line but I don't remember the details of the program. If I recall it was limited to the non-com ranks and was only for the army NG. Bob Reed www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site) KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress.... "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!" (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"RobertR237" wrote in message ... As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon retirement. Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling proves absoultely nothing. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush. Bob Reed I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired Any of you guys recall NG's with 4 year active reserve commitments in the late 60's, early 70's? I don't. Every single NG I knew was on 6 year ACTIVE reserve status. I'm sure many of them would have enjoyed getting cut loose early too. Phil I seem to remember something along that line but I don't remember the details of the program. If I recall it was limited to the non-com ranks and was only for the army NG. Bob Reed www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site) KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress.... "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!" (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman) Bob, Think of the line they would have had if *all* you had to do was a 4 year active guard hitch to go to *flight school*. Heck, I would have gone in a heartbeat rather than the SIX years of active duty I got stuck with. Not that I should complain. I managed to stay out of Vietnam too. They sent me to Okinawa instead. Anyhow, GW was one lucky guy. Anyone else would have been yanked into active duty or charged with a crime. And you're correct. They handled enlisted ranks much different. They could mix it up... 2 active (draft) 4 inactive, 3 and 3, 4 and 2, or all 6. GW had none of these as options. Phil |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Bob, Think of the line they would have had if *all* you had to do was a 4 year active guard hitch to go to *flight school*. Heck, I would have gone in a heartbeat rather than the SIX years of active duty I got stuck with. Not that I should complain. I managed to stay out of Vietnam too. They sent me to Okinawa instead. Anyhow, GW was one lucky guy. Anyone else would have been yanked into active duty or charged with a crime. And you're correct. They handled enlisted ranks much different. They could mix it up... 2 active (draft) 4 inactive, 3 and 3, 4 and 2, or all 6. GW had none of these as options. Phil Phil, You have been listening to too much hype and not enough facts regarding GW's NG duty. He did serve his full two years of full time duty and there is only a question about the last year of weekend duty. Even then, the record keeping for the weekend NG wasn't all that great and I know of several people who skipped many of their weekend calls. Rather he did or didn't really doesn't make one bit of difference now. Bob Reed www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site) KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress.... "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!" (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman) |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
He was qualified on F-102s which were being phased out at the time. I don't think he had retainability to cross train. In any event, that was a long time ago and we all suffered in that damn war so I don't understand why it's such a big part of kerry's campaign. If combat alone made one qualified to be president the Tim McVeigh was just as qualified. Yes, I came back from Viet Nam in 1972 and got out of the Army in 1973. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it as some sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in chief. The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard record from the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record which they really don't want advertised. Bob Reed www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site) KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress.... "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!" (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Corky Scott wrote:
On 26 Aug 2004 01:37:16 GMT, osite (RobertR237) wrote: It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it as some sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in chief. The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard record from the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record which they really don't want advertised. Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush, and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way, like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and teaches you to lead. It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those who knew him. As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry, figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy. Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty. As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his intent or not, he did not go. Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead. Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a decisive leader? Corky Scott with only four months, kerry likely never learned where the lever was to make the boat go faster, I've seen bosses who stay 'four months' and the lowlies run the show for him,,,,,,,,,, -- Mark Smith Tri-State Kite Sales http://www.trikite.com 1121 N Locust St Mt Vernon, IN 47620 1-812-838-6351 |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
From: Corky Scott
Date: 8/26/2004 7:53 AM Central Daylight Time Message-id: On 26 Aug 2004 01:37:16 GMT, osite (RobertR237) wrote: It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it as some sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in chief. The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard record from the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record which they really don't want advertised. Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush, and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way, like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and teaches you to lead. It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those who knew him. As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry, figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy. Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty. As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his intent or not, he did not go. Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead. Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a decisive leader? Corky Scott Main Gott, you are comparing anvils to oranges. The leadership a man learns in combat is how to lead in combat not how to run a corporation. Successful executives use managment, not leadership. There is a difference. As for the drinking and partying I can tell you have never been in the military. I am willing to bet kerry did exactly that between missions. I know I did when I was in Viet Nam in the Army. Now then, why does kerry not talk about what he has done in his political life? Kerry is always alternating between bashing Bush and bring up his Viet Nam service. I want to hear from kerry what his plans are if by some miracle he gets elected. Now the most important question: what has any of this to do with homebuilt aircraft? Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
I wonder if Chris Thomas is a real pilot? Anybody know? | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 116 | September 3rd 04 05:43 PM |
Pilot Error? Is it Mr. Damron? | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 3 | June 23rd 04 04:05 PM |
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 41 | November 20th 03 05:39 AM |
Effect of Light Sport on General Aviation | Gilan | Home Built | 17 | September 24th 03 06:11 AM |