They're Pulling me in!!!!

[Dilbert]

I left the Army in early 2001, and boy was I glad that I got out when I did. Now they may pull me back in.

For those who don't know, when you leave the Army, they still have the option to call you back in emergency situations (up to 8 years). It never happens, until now.

I hope they decide they don't need me.

The Press Release (http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_id_key=6114)

[IrishHand]

What? You don't want to fight in support of the GWOT? Nothing makes me quite as proud as telling my parents - as I did moments ago when I became aware of the fact - that I'm fighting in support of the GWOT.

[GWB]

You should be proud to serve your country, especially if we need you. We all have our role to play, mine is Commander in Chief. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

W

[Philuva]

[ QUOTE ]
You should be proud to serve your country, especially if we need you. We all have our role to play, mine is Commander in Chief.

[/ QUOTE ]

FU.

[Cptkernow]

But dilbert

Given the eridite nature of your posts you must be an 8 star general at least.

Whats to worry about ?

[ThaSaltCracka]

will you please just shut the [censored] up! Everyone is tired of listening to your [censored]. He is talking about being pulled back into a conflict simply because of your admins mis-management. I am sure he is not thrilled about this. What a complete [censored] up you have been. Now people who left the miltary a few years ago may be affected by your incompetence.

[GWB]

All this stuff is in the contract when you sign up. We spend taxpayers money to train folks, they agree to be available if needed. We are in a GWOT for pete's sake.

[ThaSaltCracka]

is that going to be your excuse for your ineptitude?

[Cptkernow]

Is that;

a Great Wankfest Organised by Twats.

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
We spend taxpayers money to train folks, they agree to be available if needed

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. While I disagree with the war and think it is a mistake of biblical proportions (I love hyperbole), a deal is a deal.

[Philuva]

[ QUOTE ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We spend taxpayers money to train folks, they agree to be available if needed


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I agree. While I disagree with the war and think it is a mistake of biblical proportions (I love hyperbole), a deal is a deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Should they also be available for the "War on Drugs" how about if Bush starts up a "War to End Breast Cancer"?

[elwoodblues]

Yes. The president is the commander in chief. Love him or hate him, that's part of his job. If you don't like it, don't vote for him. I know that I won't.

[elwoodblues]

I don't want my posts in this thread to suggest in any way that I wish you are called up or put in harm's way. I wish you the very best and sincerely hope that you stay safe.

[ericd]

Put a lid on it. This is serious stuff.

Most of us don't have a Daddy who can pull enough strings so their cowardly sons can stay stateside at a no show assignment.

[El Barto]

[ QUOTE ]
Put a lid on it. This is serious stuff.

Most of us don't have a Daddy who can pull enough strings so their cowardly sons can stay stateside at a no show assignment.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would rather have someone who served his country in a non-combat role, than someone who attacked his former fellow soldiers when he returned home and then continued to vote to weaken the defense of the country at every opportunity for decades.

[ericd]

1. Exactly how did Dubya actually serve his country in a non-combat role during the period he was eligible for the draft?

2. If I understand it correctly, Kerry attacked the conditions not his fellow sailors. He may not have been as kind to his superiors. Which in many cases was probably justified.

[El Barto]

[ QUOTE ]
Exactly how did Dubya actually serve his country in a non-combat role during the period he was eligible for the draft?


[/ QUOTE ]

As disrespected as the national guard is these days, it is in fact service to your country. You can be called up if needed (many are in Iraq and Afghanistan now). Since he was never called up, I refer to him as non-combat. They taught him to fly a jet, he could have been called for combat if needed.

Considering most people his age did not serve at all (some like Clinton actively manipulated their draft board, others fled to Canada, etc.) you have to give him some credit for serving in the guard.

[Cptkernow]

Kerry got on the Plane, went to Vietnam and fought.

Bush got daddy to make sure the above didnt happen.

Only someone who is blinded by partisan subjectivity could ignore the meaning and implications of this.

Kerry has infintely more strenghth in his charachter than Bush.

[ericd]

The National Guard receives some respect today. During Vietnam it was bascially a haven for the white elite who had no other deferments.

No matter how you spin it Dubya took advantage of his social standing and connections. Others did the same and deserve to be regarded, on this issue, as an equal to Dubya.

[adios]

So by your criteria Dole had infinitely more character than Clinton no?

[Cptkernow]

Yes when it came to doing ones duty and being strong enough as a man to go fight.

Clinton however had more personality.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
During Vietnam it was bascially a haven for the white elite who had no other deferments.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm assuming that your term "white elite" means wealthy white person. During Viet Nam war I knew a couple of guys who were in the National Guard that weren't wealthy. I'm fairly certain that the vast majority of those in the National Guard at that time weren't wealthy.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Clinton however had more personality.

[/ QUOTE ]

So is personality a more important criteria for being president than character?

[Cptkernow]

I think it helps at election time.

Bob hardly wowed the crowds.

[elwoodblues]

I think what he's saying is that White Elite were overrepresented in the National Guard, not that the National Guard was made up entirely of White Elite.

[ericd]

Yes, thank you.

Though I misspelled it, I made sure to say basically, in a futile attempt to avoid drifting down this path.

[adios]

Perhaps we should define what "white elite" are and define the criteria for a "haven" are in the context of his post. If my memory serves me correctly the National Guard was an alternative to the draft. As the Viet Nam war became more un-popular more people sought that alternative and thus there were more people that wanted to serve in the National Guard than positions available more or less.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it helps at election time.

[/ QUOTE ]

So character isn't a very relevant issue to the voters, personality is more important.

[adios]

The guys I knew that were in the National Guard didn't have to pull strings to get there.

[sameoldsht]

Good luck to you if you go.

I have a question: What makes an Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) Soldier? I mean why are there "only" 5,600 IRR Soldiers being notified about this? I'm sure there have been many more soldiers discharged than that since 2001.

[elwoodblues]

I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth here (I know, it's a change for me), but would it be better if he said something like:

During Viet Nam, it was safer to be in the National Guard than to be in one of the other branches of the military. Because of this, parents with political/economic influences pulled strings to help their kids (mostly rich white kids) get positions in the guards instead of one of the other branches. Kids of influential parents who chose to be treated like everyone else showed greater strength and character than those who took the easier way out by allowing the laurels, friendships, and influences of their parents to drive their future. I don't know if Kerry would fall into the camp of the former, but Bush probably falls in the latter (or it was just a luck coincidence that he got into the guards).

[Cptkernow]

Personaly id rather see a president with charachter.

I dont get to vote in American elections but as a person I can see that Bush used his social connections to avoid such a terrifying ordeal such as Vietnam whilst Kerry went willingly and with the same options to opt out as enjoyed by Bush.

Again if you cant admit the ramifications of this you must be mirred in deep levels of Partisan subjectivity.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Again if you cant admit the ramifications of this you must be mirred in deep levels of Partisan subjectivity.

[/ QUOTE ]

What ramifications?

So the people that voted for Clinton over Dole are as you put it are "mirred in deep levels of Partisan subjectivity" right?

[Cptkernow]

Yes.

If they insisted that Clintons decsion to stay out of Vietnam somehow would make him a better president than Bob.

However I fail totaly to see the relevance of your insitence on this comparison. Thats in the past and dosnt exist anymore. What exists now is the fact that Kerry didnt swerve Vietnam, Bush did.

In regards to Vietnam

Kerry= MAN
Bush= Coward.

Just to satisfy you on your irrelavent Clinton/Dole rant

Vietnam

Clinton=coward
Bob= MAN.

Satisfied.

[adios]

You wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
During Viet Nam, it was safer to be in the National Guard than to be in one of the other branches of the military. Because of this, parents with political/economic influences pulled strings to help their kids (mostly rich white kids) get positions in the guards instead of one of the other branches. Kids of influential parents who chose to be treated like everyone else showed greater strength and character than those who took the easier way out by allowing the laurels, friendships, and influences of their parents to drive their future.

[/ QUOTE ]

Allow me to change this to what I think it should read.

[ QUOTE ]
During Viet Nam, it was safer to be in the National Guard than to be in one of the other branches of the military. Because of this, some parents with political/economic influences pulled strings to help their kids (mostly rich white kids) get positions in the guards instead of one of the other branches for various reasons. One such reason was that they did not support this war and they did not want to see their children die in this war. They believed that the war was morally wrong and that National Guard service was a reasonable alternative to serving in that war. Another reason is that they had a very low level of committment to any war and didn't feel that any war was worth their sacrifice. The kids of influential parents who believed that the war was morally right and chose to be treated like everyone else showed greater strength and character than those who had a low level of committment to any war and/or believed that the war was morally right that took the easier way out by allowing the laurels, friendships, and influences of their parents to drive their future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think we should be condemning those that thought the Viet Nam war was morally wrong. I find it interesting that Kerry at the time stated that the military was participating in atrocities and other various war crimes but his supporters condemn Bush for not participating.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know if Kerry would fall into the camp of the former, but Bush probably falls in the latter (or it was just a luck coincidence that he got into the guards).

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW the issue to me is why did Bush choose the National Guard over service in Viet Nam (some National Guard did actually die in Viet Nam but Bush knew he probably wasn't going to see combat duty there). If Bush thought the war was morally wrong then I'm not sure he should be lambasted for his choice. If it shows a low level of committment at the time that's another story. Let's assume it indicates a low level of committment. If that's the case then Bush has probably "flip-flopped" and it would be interesting to know why that's the case but I suspect he'd admit that he has changed his viewpoint. If Bush thought the Viet Nam war was morally wrong then it would be interesting to know why he feels the current war is morally right. I suspect he'd say that the threat to civilized society makes it right.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
However I fail totaly to see the relevance of your insitence on this comparison.

[/ QUOTE ]

I take exception to your statement that I'm ranting. I'm pointing out the hypcorisy of the Demorcatic party arguements regarding National Guard service. The point is that people are playing partisan politics. The leadership of the Democratic Party saw no problem with Clinton not serving but do have a problem with Bush not serving in Viet Nam. I also find it interesting that you believe that someone who didn't serve in the Viet Nam war is a coward when they may have had very legitimate reasons for being opposed to the war. I wouldn't call somebody who flew jets in the National Guard a coward either.

[elwoodblues]

I think we're pretty close on our opinions here. If he thought it was morally wrong, then he could have submitted himself as a consciencious objector or said "no" and gone to jail. That shows more character than pulling strings to get into the guards.

[Garbonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We spend taxpayers money to train folks, they agree to be available if needed


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I agree. While I disagree with the war and think it is a mistake of biblical proportions (I love hyperbole), a deal is a deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Should they also be available for the "War on Drugs" how about if Bush starts up a "War to End Breast Cancer"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would support a War to Stop Breast Cancer before I would support the current campaign or the "War on Drugs".

[Garbonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we're pretty close on our opinions here. If he thought it was morally wrong, then he could have submitted himself as a consciencious objector or said "no" and gone to jail. That shows more character than pulling strings to get into the guards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ali.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW the issue to me is why did Bush choose the National Guard over service in Viet Nam (some National Guard did actually die in Viet Nam but Bush knew he probably wasn't going to see combat duty there). If Bush thought the war was morally wrong then I'm not sure he should be lambasted for his choice. If it shows a low level of committment at the time that's another story. Let's assume it indicates a low level of committment. If that's the case then Bush has probably "flip-flopped" and it would be interesting to know why that's the case but I suspect he'd admit that he has changed his viewpoint. If Bush thought the Viet Nam war was morally wrong then it would be interesting to know why he feels the current war is morally right. I suspect he'd say that the threat to civilized society makes it right.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you painted yourself into a corner here. If Bush was morally against the war in Vietnam, then why would he be so for war now? Clearly that wasn't the case. I don't understand why republicans just don't admit that he didn't want to got to Vietnam so his daddy pulled some strings. Colin Powell even said some time ago that the National Guard was a refuge for rich kids who didn't want to go to Vietnam.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you painted yourself into a corner here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know that people are trying to trap me. What a waste of their time /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

[ QUOTE ]
If Bush was morally against the war in Vietnam, then why would he be so for war now?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wrote (btw notice the word "if"):

If Bush thought the war was morally wrong then I'm not sure he should be lambasted for his choice.


[ QUOTE ]
Clearly that wasn't the case. I don't understand why republicans just don't admit that he didn't want to got to Vietnam so his daddy pulled some strings.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assumed that he had a low level of committment. I wrote about his low level of comittment:

Let's assume it indicates a low level of committment. If that's the case then Bush has probably "flip-flopped" and it would be interesting to know why that's the case but I suspect he'd admit that he has changed his viewpoint.

[ QUOTE ]
Colin Powell even said some time ago that the National Guard was a refuge for rich kids who didn't want to go to Vietnam.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently you didn't read the whole thread where this ground was covered.

[adios]

Yes I think we're but I don't necessarily agree with the following statement you made for all people:

[ QUOTE ]
If he thought it was morally wrong, then he could have submitted himself as a consciencious objector or said "no" and gone to jail. That shows more character than pulling strings to get into the guards.

[/ QUOTE ]

To take Bush out of this. A person can be for the defense of the United States for instance but be opposed to one particular war and feel that service in the National Guard is the best option. I don't see why such an individual should be viewed as having less character. For one thing such a person probably wouldn't receive conciencious objector status (not opposed to all wars) and that person isn't opposed to serving in the military. Kerry stated that the Viet Nam war was more or less immoral. Apparently the real gripe is with the "pulling strings" part. Well all I can say is that people change and I dare say that people can develop and often do as they grow older. I don't know how old you are but 35 years from now I'd be willing to bet that you'd have developed more character than you already have. Many of the same "character" issues could be up regarding Clinton but those people that bring them up against Bush for the most part ignored them regarding Clinton. Political rhetoric as usual.

[ThaSaltCracka]

settle down chief, I wasn't trying to refute what you said, I was just throwing in my 2 cents.

[adios]

I was very calm when I wrote my reply. Still am.

[ThaSaltCracka]

good, I feel better now too, just breath adios /images/graemlins/wink.gif
Everything will be fine after Nov 2, when Kerry is elected /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[paland]

[ QUOTE ]
I would rather have someone who served his country in a non-combat role, than someone who attacked his former fellow soldiers when he returned home and then continued to vote to weaken the defense of the country at every opportunity for decades.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't insult us Viet Nam vets with this crap. He was a deserter plain and simple. If you want to be an [censored], then so be it, but please don't insult us vets.

[adios]

Kerry won't win on his own merits, it's Bush's election to lose.

[ QUOTE ]
Everything will be fine after Nov 2, when Kerry is elected

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't bet the ranch on that one.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Kerry won't win on his own merits, it's Bush's election to lose.


[/ QUOTE ]
Honestly, how sad is that. Both of these idiots suck!

[GWB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would rather have someone who served his country in a non-combat role, than someone who attacked his former fellow soldiers when he returned home and then continued to vote to weaken the defense of the country at every opportunity for decades.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't insult us Viet Nam vets with this crap. He was a deserter plain and simple. If you want to be an [censored], then so be it, but if you want to insult us vets, we can meet personally and discuss it if you want.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its sad that your political extremism clouds your logic. Look up the definition of deserter. The vast majority of the people of that age did not go to Vietnam or have any obligation to serve in any way. To sign up for any role in support of your country is more than most did.

When you consider that Kerry has tried as Senator to cripple the military, I think any honest person would say that just being supportive of the efforts of US forces in the world is a positive thing. Sadly Kerry doesn't reach this level.

[Dilbert]

Hey this thread is supposed to be about me. You guys turned it into another generic political thread.

My life, my freedom of action is potentially at stake here.

What about me?

[paland]

[ QUOTE ]
What about me?

[/ QUOTE ]
If you don't agree with the politics, then don't go. I mean it. No vet will hold it against you.

[ChristinaB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What about me?

[/ QUOTE ]
If you don't agree with the politics, then don't go. I mean it. No vet will hold it against you.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree with your basic opinion of this war, I see a disturbing trend in your recent posts. You seem to be saying that only the opinions of Vets matter in such issues.

You don't have to be a Vet to have the right to be heard on these issues, and being a Vet doesn't make your opinion more valid or more worthy of being listened to.

[ThaSaltCracka]

I apologize man, I feel bad for you, being potentially pulled into a conflict because of the mismanagement of the Bush admin. I hope neither you or anyone else in your posistion gets called up.

[TimTimSalabim]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey this thread is supposed to be about me. You guys turned it into another generic political thread.

My life, my freedom of action is potentially at stake here.

What about me?

[/ QUOTE ]

There's always Canada. And as a bonus, they don't tax poker winnings!

[paland]

[ QUOTE ]
You don't have to be a Vet to have the right to be heard on these issues, and being a Vet doesn't make your opinion more valid or more worthy of being listened to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't read into it more than their actually is. I've noticed that in your threads, you have a trend to think that you are always correct. If you have a problem with it, go see a shrink. I don't care what you really think. Even if you were a vet.

[Dilbert]

[ QUOTE ]
I've noticed that in your threads, you have a trend to think that you are always correct. If you have a problem with it, go see a shrink. I don't care what you really think. Even if you were a vet.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've got Christina pegged exactly. Once she gets her breasts she will be unstoppable.

[jokerswild]

You have to be the most ignorant guy on here. Seriously, man.

[jokerswild]

Sorry to inform you, but GWB is not George W.Bush.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to inform you, but GWB is not George W.Bush

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you finally figure that out?

[ericd]

I'm sorry I got us off on this tangent. All I wanted to do was point out that the impact on your life and those in the same situation is serious and should not be taken lightly. I thought GWB was off base. There are times and places for his rants. I thought this issue was not it.

[Dilbert]

You guys are so gullible. I was never in the Army. I just thought this was a neat way to start this topic in the "crackpot" forum. /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[CORed]

If you believe that there was really any possibility of Dubbya being called up to serve in combat while he was in the National Guard, I also have some sad news for you about Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. I would give Dubya a little credit for being in the guard if he had actually showed up when he was supposed to. Since he didn't, but got away with it because his daddy was a congressman, I think he deserves zero credit.