Taliban reclaims Afghanistan

[MDlaxfan76]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

[old salt]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

I understand your position, however it is simplistic & too black & white. There are several components of the military where the possibility of combat is everpresent, regardless of the news of the day. Those also tend to be the units which endure the greatest risk & suffer the most casualties during training & "routine" operations.

In 1966, as a 17 year old, 1 month out of HS, I entered service during a hot war. I did so despite the fact that we were at war, not because of it. Combat operations for which I qualified ended as I was about to enter the final phase of training prior to deployment. When I chose to serve, there was no way I could reasonably anticipate whether or not I would see combat. It does not work that way.

c&s has told us that he was an Army paratrooper (82nd Airborne, I believe ?) in the late '70's, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Do you recall Desert One? Additionally, that was the height of the Cold War. Our Airborne Divisions were in a constant state of readiness for rapid deployment to Europe, Iran or Korea. The E border of W Germany was heavily fortified with NATO forces constantly in the field & on alert. Likewise in Korea. In 1976, I was deployed aboard the USS Kirk as she switched home ports from San Diego to Japan. Shortly after our initial arrival in Yokosuka, we were ordered back to sea, on short notice, as part of the Midway battle group. We sailed around the Japanese mainland, into the Sea of Japan, E of Korea, within striking distance, after 2 US Army officers were killed near the DMZ in the "tree war". You may have been tuned out at the time but it was real to those of us involved.

[Typical Lax Dad]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

I understand your position, however it is simplistic & too black & white. There are several components of the military where the possibility of combat is everpresent, regardless of the news of the day. Those also tend to be the units which endure the greatest risk & suffer the most casualties during training & "routine" operations.

In 1966, as a 17 year old, 1 month out of HS, I entered service during a hot war. I did so despite the fact that we were at war, not because of it. Combat operations for which I qualified ended as I was about to enter the final phase of training prior to deployment. When I chose to serve, there was no way I could reasonably anticipate whether or not I would see combat. It does not work that way.

c&s has told us that he was an Army paratrooper (82nd Airborne, I believe ?) in the late '70's, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Do you recall Desert One? Additionally, that was the height of the Cold War. Our Airborne Divisions were in a constant state of readiness for rapid deployment to Europe, Iran or Korea. The E border of W Germany was heavily fortified with NATO forces constantly in the field & on alert. Likewise in Korea. In 1976, I was deployed aboard the USS Kirk as she switched home ports from San Diego to Japan. Shortly after our initial arrival in Yokosuka, we were ordered back to sea, on short notice, as part of the Midway battle group. We sailed around the Japanese mainland, into the Sea of Japan, E of Korea, within striking distance, after 2 US Army officers were killed near the DMZ in the "tree war". You may have been tuned out at the time but it was real to those of us involved.

You mean the Desert One you laugh about? Those copters still there? Someone should have told them there is sand in the desert….that Desert One?

[Farfromgeneva]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

I understand your position, however it is simplistic & too black & white. There are several components of the military where the possibility of combat is everpresent, regardless of the news of the day. Those also tend to be the units which endure the greatest risk & suffer the most casualties during training & "routine" operations.

In 1966, as a 17 year old, 1 month out of HS, I entered service during a hot war. I did so despite the fact that we were at war, not because of it. Combat operations for which I qualified ended as I was about to enter the final phase of training prior to deployment. When I chose to serve, there was no way I could reasonably anticipate whether or not I would see combat. It does not work that way.

c&s has told us that he was an Army paratrooper (82nd Airborne, I believe ?) in the late '70's, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Do you recall Desert One? Additionally, that was the height of the Cold War. Our Airborne Divisions were in a constant state of readiness for rapid deployment to Europe, Iran or Korea. The E border of W Germany was heavily fortified with NATO forces constantly in the field & on alert. Likewise in Korea. In 1976, I was deployed aboard the USS Kirk as she switched home ports from San Diego to Japan. Shortly after our initial arrival in Yokosuka, we were ordered back to sea, on short notice, as part of the Midway battle group. We sailed around the Japanese mainland, into the Sea of Japan, E of Korea, within striking distance, after 2 US Army officers were killed near the DMZ in the "tree war". You may have been tuned out at the time but it was real to those of us involved.

You mean the Desert One you laugh about? Those copters still there? Someone should have told them there is sand in the desert….that Desert One?

Your view is not minced and too obtuse because you never served. Only military folks can understand that and be worldly enough to be experts in metaphysics of all topics.

Tiring. This is the same stuff general yell at their “civilian” bosses like congress all the time. The military works for the citizens of this country not the other way around. There’s no military (consequently no military training for these stiffs) without citizens to represent and foot the bill. It’s like parks and recreation telling you that you can’t opine into your kids crappy tennis game because they clean the courts.

I know enough people who’ve been shot, flew apache choppers in Iraq during desert storm etc and those folks never, ever, ever act like or take the position that the ones on these boards do. I repeat the ones who’ve been through hell don’t act like this or ever take this position.

[Typical Lax Dad]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

I understand your position, however it is simplistic & too black & white. There are several components of the military where the possibility of combat is everpresent, regardless of the news of the day. Those also tend to be the units which endure the greatest risk & suffer the most casualties during training & "routine" operations.

In 1966, as a 17 year old, 1 month out of HS, I entered service during a hot war. I did so despite the fact that we were at war, not because of it. Combat operations for which I qualified ended as I was about to enter the final phase of training prior to deployment. When I chose to serve, there was no way I could reasonably anticipate whether or not I would see combat. It does not work that way.

c&s has told us that he was an Army paratrooper (82nd Airborne, I believe ?) in the late '70's, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Do you recall Desert One? Additionally, that was the height of the Cold War. Our Airborne Divisions were in a constant state of readiness for rapid deployment to Europe, Iran or Korea. The E border of W Germany was heavily fortified with NATO forces constantly in the field & on alert. Likewise in Korea. In 1976, I was deployed aboard the USS Kirk as she switched home ports from San Diego to Japan. Shortly after our initial arrival in Yokosuka, we were ordered back to sea, on short notice, as part of the Midway battle group. We sailed around the Japanese mainland, into the Sea of Japan, E of Korea, within striking distance, after 2 US Army officers were killed near the DMZ in the "tree war". You may have been tuned out at the time but it was real to those of us involved.

You mean the Desert One you laugh about? Those copters still there? Someone should have told them there is sand in the desert….that Desert One?

Your view is not minced and too obtuse because you never served. Only military folks can understand that and be worldly enough to be experts in metaphysics of all topics.

Tiring. This is the same stuff general yell at their “civilian” bosses like congress all the time. The military works for the citizens of this country not the other way around. There’s no military (consequently no military training for these stiffs) without citizens to represent and foot the bill. It’s like parks and recreation telling you that you can’t opine into your kids crappy tennis game because they clean the courts.

I know enough people who’ve been shot, flew apache choppers in Iraq during desert storm etc and those folks never, ever, ever act like or take the position that the ones on these boards do. I repeat the ones who’ve been through hell don’t act like this or ever take this position.

Never served so I don’t understand why Jimmy sending those boys in and crashed is humorous.

[Farfromgeneva]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

I understand your position, however it is simplistic & too black & white. There are several components of the military where the possibility of combat is everpresent, regardless of the news of the day. Those also tend to be the units which endure the greatest risk & suffer the most casualties during training & "routine" operations.

In 1966, as a 17 year old, 1 month out of HS, I entered service during a hot war. I did so despite the fact that we were at war, not because of it. Combat operations for which I qualified ended as I was about to enter the final phase of training prior to deployment. When I chose to serve, there was no way I could reasonably anticipate whether or not I would see combat. It does not work that way.

c&s has told us that he was an Army paratrooper (82nd Airborne, I believe ?) in the late '70's, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Do you recall Desert One? Additionally, that was the height of the Cold War. Our Airborne Divisions were in a constant state of readiness for rapid deployment to Europe, Iran or Korea. The E border of W Germany was heavily fortified with NATO forces constantly in the field & on alert. Likewise in Korea. In 1976, I was deployed aboard the USS Kirk as she switched home ports from San Diego to Japan. Shortly after our initial arrival in Yokosuka, we were ordered back to sea, on short notice, as part of the Midway battle group. We sailed around the Japanese mainland, into the Sea of Japan, E of Korea, within striking distance, after 2 US Army officers were killed near the DMZ in the "tree war". You may have been tuned out at the time but it was real to those of us involved.

You mean the Desert One you laugh about? Those copters still there? Someone should have told them there is sand in the desert….that Desert One?

Your view is not minced and too obtuse because you never served. Only military folks can understand that and be worldly enough to be experts in metaphysics of all topics.

Tiring. This is the same stuff general yell at their “civilian” bosses like congress all the time. The military works for the citizens of this country not the other way around. There’s no military (consequently no military training for these stiffs) without citizens to represent and foot the bill. It’s like parks and recreation telling you that you can’t opine into your kids crappy tennis game because they clean the courts.

I know enough people who’ve been shot, flew apache choppers in Iraq during desert storm etc and those folks never, ever, ever act like or take the position that the ones on these boards do. I repeat the ones who’ve been through hell don’t act like this or ever take this position.

Never served so I don’t understand why Jimmy sending those boys in and crashed is humorous.

I’m sure there’s some mangled way one will twist the story to justify said position. It won’t hold up to intelligent folks and then it’ll be back to you just don’t understand”. Meanwhile some of these folks are talking about macroeconomics, science etc as if every other topic is fair game without experience but theirs...

My friends (6-7) who’s been shot in combat would beat the crap out of people that acted like they do.

[DMac]

Farfromgeneva wrote
I know enough people who’ve been shot, flew apache choppers in Iraq during desert storm etc and those folks never, ever, ever act like or take the position that the ones on these boards do. I repeat the ones who’ve been through hell don’t act like this or ever take this position.

You probably have a black friend too, eh?
There are very few on these boards who have served in the military, so exactly who is it that you're referring to?
"I know enough people who have been shot" Geezuz H, GMAFB. You been hangin' out at the VFW or Legion listening to war stories in your travels?
"The ones who have been through hell", tell me more about all those people you know and how you know their stories to be true. You know one who pushed a gook out of a chopper cuz he wouldn't talk too?

[Farfromgeneva]

Farfromgeneva wrote
I know enough people who’ve been shot, flew apache choppers in Iraq during desert storm etc and those folks never, ever, ever act like or take the position that the ones on these boards do. I repeat the ones who’ve been through hell don’t act like this or ever take this position.

You probably have a black friend too, eh?
There are very few on these boards who have served in the military, so exactly who is it that you're referring to?
"I know enough people who have been shot" Geezuz H, GMAFB. You been hangin' out at the VFW or Legion listening to war stories in your travels?
"The ones who have been through hell", tell me more about all those people you know and how you know their stories to be true. You know one who pushed a gook out of a chopper cuz he wouldn't talk too?

Nobody was talking about you. I’m talking to the two Dolan who brag (cradle) and throw it in everyone’s faces or dismiss everyone else and shut down conversations because they’re experts on topics as if there isn’t a difference between strategy and tactical and they do segregate them two in service I also know from a fact. I think these two don’t understand the tactical every well at all and hide behind service rather than have an open and honest dialogue. I’ll go enlist now just to shut you all up. And if you paid attention to context this one started with the hypercritical and weak Cradle shitting on MD for not taking risk-unsolicited and out of left field (see sharing his abuse of MD on here then his worry lame dropping our conversation because he was salty thinking he’d hurt me like a small child wouldn’t do). It’s the 50th, no 100th tiem one of two or three people do this. Why don’t you go back and start from the beginning of the conversation before chiming in or else this is you: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ks072waMayk

You guys don’t have a monopoly on this stuff. Im talking about a good friend with serious ptsd and a Purple Heart how about that. Who’s family wa a military royalty. Another guy, IC head who spent 9yrs in Iraq. You’re a clown for your comments here just stop. There’s been more damage in the past 20-30yrs long after any of you were in any danger.

You know doc is showing up for your use of language. Or is that something people don’t understand because w didnt serve. You have a free pass to toss “gook” around too eh? How about my father who served but never acted like you all. How about my wife’s cousin who’s a weatherman in Hawaii and consistently got forecasts wrong for tech football games, plans on 20yrs get a pension and “double
Dip” without ever having any risk but shows up at every function like my wedding and when not necessary suited to the nines wanting people to blow him even though he’s using it to avoid the private sector?

None of you have a monopoly on this. I could in front of you and tell you the same thing I’m not hiding like so many behind these boards.

Hey don’t you clowns demand that service related topics require a screening and set ice of any kind before discussing it and shut everyone else out so you can all circle jerk each other nonstop?

[DMac]

Farfromgeneva wrote
I know enough people who’ve been shot, flew apache choppers in Iraq during desert storm etc and those folks never, ever, ever act like or take the position that the ones on these boards do. I repeat the ones who’ve been through hell don’t act like this or ever take this position.

You probably have a black friend too, eh?
There are very few on these boards who have served in the military, so exactly who is it that you're referring to?
"I know enough people who have been shot" Geezuz H, GMAFB. You been hangin' out at the VFW or Legion listening to war stories in your travels?
"The ones who have been through hell", tell me more about all those people you know and how you know their stories to be true. You know one who pushed a gook out of a chopper cuz he wouldn't talk too?

Nobody was talking about you. I’m talking to the two Dolan who brag (cradle) and throw it in everyone’s faces or dismiss everyone else and shut down conversations because they’re experts on topics as if there isn’t a difference between strategy and tactical and they do segregate them two in service I also know from a fact. I think these two don’t understand the tactical every well at all and hide behind service rather than have an open and honest dialogue. I’ll go enlist now just to shut you all up. No you won't, they wouldn't take you...and you know it. And if you paid attention to context this one started with the hypercritical and weak Cradle shitting on MD for not taking risk-unsolicited and out of left field (see sharing his abuse of MD on here then his worry lame dropping our conversation because he was salty thinking he’d hurt me like a small child wouldn’t do). It’s the 50th, no 100th tiem one of two or three people do this. Why don’t you go back and start from the beginning of the conversation before chiming in or else this is you: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ks072waMayk
Nope, haven't been following it, don't care enough about it to go back to the beginning...not a chance.
"and those folks never, ever, ever act like or take the position that the ones on these boards do. I repeat the ones who’ve been through hell don’t act like this or ever take this position." As one of the few ex military guys on these boards you you can see where I would think this would include me, no? Oh, and you do know better than to use, never ever, right?
You guys don’t have a monopoly on this stuff. Im talking about a good friend with serious ptsd and a Purple Heart how about that. Who’s family wa a military royalty.What's this mean, military royalty? My father's buried in Arlington with his three Bronze Stars, Silver Star (all with Vs) and three Purple Hearts. I did a Vietnam tour too, so is my family military royalty too? Another guy, IC head who spent 9yrs in Iraq.If he spent nine years in Iraq he wanted to be there. Figure he had some nice AC in his quarters? You’re a clown for your comments here just stop.Pot meet kettle. There’s been more damage in the past 20-30yrs long after any of you were in any danger. Which means what, we don't understand any of that?

You know doc is showing up for your use of language. Or is that something people don’t understand because w didnt serve. You have a free pass to toss “gook” around too eh?No culture cancel going on there, my friend, just sayin' it like it was said when that BS story was flying around. Oh, and you know I don't much give a schidt what Doc thinks. How about my father who served but never acted like you all. You all again includes me. How about my wife’s cousin who’s a weatherman in Hawaii and consistently got forecasts wrong for tech football games, plans on 20yrs get a pension and “double
Dip” without ever having any risk but shows up at every function like my wedding and when not necessary suited to the nines wanting people to blow him even though he’s using it to avoid the private sector? You're just rambling on with bullschidt and grasping at straws here.

None of you have a monopoly on this. No one said they did. I could in front of you and tell you the same thing I’m not hiding like so many behind these boards.I don't hide from jack shidt, tough guy. Would have no problem "discussing" this eyeball to eyeball with you...highly doubt salty or cradle would either.

Hey don’t you clowns demand that service related topics require a screening and set ice of any kind before discussing it and shut everyone else out so you can all circle jerk each other nonstop?
Gook is out of line but you can throw this kind of schidt around, eh? You take that handful of meds you take daily yet this morning? I'm thinkin' not.

[Farfromgeneva]

Sure shouldn’t use absolute terms my bad.

But if you don’t go back for context then you are out of your element and shouldn’t have opined in the first place. Makes you flat out wrong and I should dismiss everything you write after that. You’re just arguing without understanding for some reason that’s not logical or legitimate just to argue.

Only a lesser human being would reference the meds it’s small and weak to shut down any conversation without having made any cogent point. Especially for a guy who keeps on cannabis so much to self medicate...that’s grasping at straws. How about this. Either get the context before speaking or stfu.

Here’s a definition of service

Definition of service (Entry 1 of 5)
1a : the occupation or function of serving
in active service
b : employment as a servant
entered his service
2a : the work performed by one that serves
good service
b : HELP, USE, BENEFIT
glad to be of service
c : contribution to the welfare of others
d : disposal for use
I'm entirely at your service

[cradleandshoot]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

I understand your position, however it is simplistic & too black & white. There are several components of the military where the possibility of combat is everpresent, regardless of the news of the day. Those also tend to be the units which endure the greatest risk & suffer the most casualties during training & "routine" operations.

In 1966, as a 17 year old, 1 month out of HS, I entered service during a hot war. I did so despite the fact that we were at war, not because of it. Combat operations for which I qualified ended as I was about to enter the final phase of training prior to deployment. When I chose to serve, there was no way I could reasonably anticipate whether or not I would see combat. It does not work that way.

c&s has told us that he was an Army paratrooper (82nd Airborne, I believe ?) in the late '70's, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Do you recall Desert One? Additionally, that was the height of the Cold War. Our Airborne Divisions were in a constant state of readiness for rapid deployment to Europe, Iran or Korea. The E border of W Germany was heavily fortified with NATO forces constantly in the field & on alert. Likewise in Korea. In 1976, I was deployed aboard the USS Kirk as she switched home ports from San Diego to Japan. Shortly after our initial arrival in Yokosuka, we were ordered back to sea, on short notice, as part of the Midway battle group. We sailed around the Japanese mainland, into the Sea of Japan, E of Korea, within striking distance, after 2 US Army officers were killed near the DMZ in the "tree war". You may have been tuned out at the time but it was real to those of us involved.

https://www.wearethemighty.com/popular/ ... ge-crisis/

I'm betting many folks on this forum don't remember this. Those that do probably don't remember the desecration of the charred remains of these fallen service members. Chunks of them cut out with knives and held up as the Iranians smiled and laughed. Things have been sanitized today so people don't become upset. i wonder today if the mainstream media will show those heartbreaking pictures of the people jumping out of the towers. i remember the man and woman hand in hand as they fell to their deaths. Maybe we all need to be reminded what brutality looks like up close and personal.

[DMac]

Sure shouldn’t use absolute terms my bad.

This is what brought me into it, my friend. When you talk about all of the military clowns, that includes me.
Be more specific in who you want to call clowns next time.

[cradleandshoot]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

I understand your position, however it is simplistic & too black & white. There are several components of the military where the possibility of combat is everpresent, regardless of the news of the day. Those also tend to be the units which endure the greatest risk & suffer the most casualties during training & "routine" operations.

In 1966, as a 17 year old, 1 month out of HS, I entered service during a hot war. I did so despite the fact that we were at war, not because of it. Combat operations for which I qualified ended as I was about to enter the final phase of training prior to deployment. When I chose to serve, there was no way I could reasonably anticipate whether or not I would see combat. It does not work that way.

c&s has told us that he was an Army paratrooper (82nd Airborne, I believe ?) in the late '70's, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Do you recall Desert One? Additionally, that was the height of the Cold War. Our Airborne Divisions were in a constant state of readiness for rapid deployment to Europe, Iran or Korea. The E border of W Germany was heavily fortified with NATO forces constantly in the field & on alert. Likewise in Korea. In 1976, I was deployed aboard the USS Kirk as she switched home ports from San Diego to Japan. Shortly after our initial arrival in Yokosuka, we were ordered back to sea, on short notice, as part of the Midway battle group. We sailed around the Japanese mainland, into the Sea of Japan, E of Korea, within striking distance, after 2 US Army officers were killed near the DMZ in the "tree war". You may have been tuned out at the time but it was real to those of us involved.

https://www.wearethemighty.com/popular/ ... ge-crisis/

I'm betting many folks on this forum don't remember this. Those that do probably don't remember the desecration of the charred remains of these fallen service members. Chunks of them cut out with knives and held up as the Iranians smiled and laughed. Things have been sanitized today so people don't become upset. i wonder today if the mainstream media will show those heartbreaking pictures of the people jumping out of the towers. i remember the man and woman hand in hand as they fell to their deaths. Maybe we all need to be reminded what brutality looks like up close and personal. I remember when i was at Bragg they were never Delta Force. They were referred to as Blue Light. Col. Charles Beckwith was their leader. A man who was a legend in his own time when it came to special ops.

[Farfromgeneva]

Sure shouldn’t use absolute terms my bad.

This is what brought me into it, my friend. When you talk about all of the military clowns, that includes me.
Be more specific in who you want to call clowns next time.

Fair enough and I know better and apologize to you and those that haven’t behaved this way here (or elsewhere) but you should also understand there’s two in specific who use this as justification to shut others down incredibly frequently and in this very context was throwing his dick around at MD like a petty jerkoff.

Here’s another friend, now dead, Johnny Guerry. https://mobile.twitter.com/jguerry81. Died last spring from booze only and our mutual friend was banging on me to take a look in the mirror because he knew as WE had partied hard over the prior decade many times. Former a army Ranger who is in his 40s and literally drank himself to death, no other drugs. He was partners in a fund with a very close friend so became a friend. For all his problems (and I think he had family stuff his family sold a pharma business into Perdue and he managed $200mm of Perdue money for years so there a morose irony to it). Ive been very close to many who took far more risk than OS or Cradle and had horrible consequences and never acted that way.

[Kismet]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

I understand your position, however it is simplistic & too black & white. There are several components of the military where the possibility of combat is everpresent, regardless of the news of the day. Those also tend to be the units which endure the greatest risk & suffer the most casualties during training & "routine" operations.

In 1966, as a 17 year old, 1 month out of HS, I entered service during a hot war. I did so despite the fact that we were at war, not because of it. Combat operations for which I qualified ended as I was about to enter the final phase of training prior to deployment. When I chose to serve, there was no way I could reasonably anticipate whether or not I would see combat. It does not work that way.

c&s has told us that he was an Army paratrooper (82nd Airborne, I believe ?) in the late '70's, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Do you recall Desert One? Additionally, that was the height of the Cold War. Our Airborne Divisions were in a constant state of readiness for rapid deployment to Europe, Iran or Korea. The E border of W Germany was heavily fortified with NATO forces constantly in the field & on alert. Likewise in Korea. In 1976, I was deployed aboard the USS Kirk as she switched home ports from San Diego to Japan. Shortly after our initial arrival in Yokosuka, we were ordered back to sea, on short notice, as part of the Midway battle group. We sailed around the Japanese mainland, into the Sea of Japan, E of Korea, within striking distance, after 2 US Army officers were killed near the DMZ in the "tree war". You may have been tuned out at the time but it was real to those of us involved.

https://www.wearethemighty.com/popular/ ... ge-crisis/

I'm betting many folks on this forum don't remember this. Those that do probably don't remember the desecration of the charred remains of these fallen service members. Chunks of them cut out with knives and held up as the Iranians smiled and laughed. Things have been sanitized today so people don't become upset. i wonder today if the mainstream media will show those heartbreaking pictures of the people jumping out of the towers. i remember the man and woman hand in hand as they fell to their deaths. Maybe we all need to be reminded what brutality looks like up close and personal.

We remember.
Might also interest you to know and incredibly, that all 8 bodies were promptly returned to the USA for burial. (That said, the Iranian took full advantage to show them at the crash site to make their point being the dirtbags that they were and still are). Kindly cite some visual evidence or any other credible source to the contrary other than the usual hysterical howlers of that time who like their contemporary howlers just say sh*t for the sake of saying it.

Agreed on your 9/11 remembrance and you might think a for a moment to STFU about all this in their memory for a day. Those of us who lost friends and family on that day would appreciate it. The mainstream media you condemn actually did show some of those pictures back then. Many were not very happy about it.

[Brooklyn]

Here’s a definition of service

Definition of service (Entry 1 of 5)
1a : the occupation or function of serving
in active service
b : employment as a servant
entered his service
2a : the work performed by one that serves
good service
b : HELP, USE, BENEFIT
glad to be of service
c : contribution to the welfare of others
d : disposal for use
I'm entirely at your service

I served for 12 years or so in the Treasury Department. But nobody says "thank you" to me for my award winning service.

[cradleandshoot]

Sure shouldn’t use absolute terms my bad.

This is what brought me into it, my friend. When you talk about all of the military clowns, that includes me.
Be more specific in who you want to call clowns next time.

I have been called much worse by some of my own drill sergeants. I wish i could have handed out a personal invitation to some folks here to have had the opportunity to join us on a rifle run. Sometimes they would even pop CS grenades at the turn around point so we could run through that. Nothing like the sting of CS gas on sweat soaked skin. The choking and puking was just extra added fun thrown in for good measure. It was all just about good training and building character.

[Farfromgeneva]

Here’s a definition of service

Definition of service (Entry 1 of 5)
1a : the occupation or function of serving
in active service
b : employment as a servant
entered his service
2a : the work performed by one that serves
good service
b : HELP, USE, BENEFIT
glad to be of service
c : contribution to the welfare of others
d : disposal for use
I'm entirely at your service

I served for 12 years or so in the Treasury Department. But nobody says "thank you" to me for my award winning service.

Was it service or transactional? That’s part of it. If it was transactional then you don’t get the glory, it was a tradeoff. If you served like my close friend who got shot up in Iraq whos family was done wrong by the military when his father died and they were kicked out of town within 30 days and had family military royalty and yet after college instead of a crappy white collar back office entry level job said “forget how they did my family dirty I’m going to enlist” and subsequently has had his life destroyed for doing so in the name of service is different.

[Farfromgeneva]

Sure shouldn’t use absolute terms my bad.

This is what brought me into it, my friend. When you talk about all of the military clowns, that includes me.
Be more specific in who you want to call clowns next time.

I have been called much worse by some of my own drill sergeants. I wish i could have handed out a personal invitation to some folks here to have had the opportunity to join us on a rifle run. Sometimes they would even pop CS grenades at the turn around point so we could run through that. Nothing like the sting of CS gas on sweat soaked skin. The choking and puking was just extra added fun thrown in for good measure. It was all just about good training and building character.

I guess it all goes away after you leave service with respect to character then.

[Typical Lax Dad]

And yes, Salty, I quite understand "differential risk"; I separately responded to cradle, which he's apparently ignored, about my father's experience during peacetime service.

Moreover, I find it offensive when one pretends to have done the same thing in combat training in peacetime as those who have actually signed up to serve in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, knowing they'd be taking a heck of a lot more "differential risk". I know several such and it ain't the same thing. Which doesn't subtract from the 'service' of the peacetime soldier/sailor, etc.

As a matter of historical perspective, to better appreciate your differential perspective of those who served --

Do you consider the Cold War "peacetime" -- with the Korean War, Hungarian uprising, Prague Spring, Pueblo incident, Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, Iran hostage crisis, Granada, Panama, Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down) et. al. ?

Post Cold War/pre 9-11 -- Balkan conflicts, Somalia (Blackhawk down), Desert Shield. Desert Storm, Provide Comfort, Northern & Southern Watch no-fly zones, Desert Fox, USS Stark, USS Cole

Do you differentiate those who chose to enter service, or remain beyond initial obligation, before & after the draft existed ?

Or do you perhaps have a sliding scale of regard which better aligns with your political prejudices ?

Although not as well publicized (or as politicized) as the "dignified transfer of remains" via Dover (a horrible military term used to describe the final journey home), service members who perish during your malleable definition of "peacetime" are still afforded full military honors.

When you take the oath to serve you are not assured "peacetime" for your entire term of obligated service.

as if I don't understand that there's risk of being in harm's way during all such periods. Did you read what I wrote about my dad's experience? Not sure what "political prejudices" you think I may have with regard to military service and how those would impact these questions.

But yeah, I do "differentiate" the risk taken between those who entered service specifically because there was a hot war to be fought, knowing that's very likely what they would be doing, and actually did go into combat, and those who did so during peacetime because they'd f'd up in HS and had few college or career choices. Much less those who phonied up an excuse or pulled strings to avoid danger, service in a hot war.

The latter doesn't apply to you, as I understand it (Annapolis?), but does for many who enter service that way. Though I "differentiate" the risk involved in that choice, and the motivation of that choice, I'm certainly not denigrating the latter choice in life path. Indeed, lots of those who do so grow up and turn out to be terrific people, contributing members of society...and some die in that service. I certainly wouldn't have it any other way in terms of 'full military honors'.

However, I also don't automatically impute "honor" to anyone simply because they "served", though my tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt of such absent evidence to the contrary. But not all who served, at any particular level, did so honorably regardless of how long they were in or what their official exit from service was. But those who did so honorably and bravely certainly do deserve respect and appreciation for that service.

So, too, do others who serve and contribute to their communities honorably, just not in the military.

That's my view, not black and white, more nuanced...not sure how "political prejudices" would have anything to do with it.

I understand your position, however it is simplistic & too black & white. There are several components of the military where the possibility of combat is everpresent, regardless of the news of the day. Those also tend to be the units which endure the greatest risk & suffer the most casualties during training & "routine" operations.

In 1966, as a 17 year old, 1 month out of HS, I entered service during a hot war. I did so despite the fact that we were at war, not because of it. Combat operations for which I qualified ended as I was about to enter the final phase of training prior to deployment. When I chose to serve, there was no way I could reasonably anticipate whether or not I would see combat. It does not work that way.

c&s has told us that he was an Army paratrooper (82nd Airborne, I believe ?) in the late '70's, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Do you recall Desert One? Additionally, that was the height of the Cold War. Our Airborne Divisions were in a constant state of readiness for rapid deployment to Europe, Iran or Korea. The E border of W Germany was heavily fortified with NATO forces constantly in the field & on alert. Likewise in Korea. In 1976, I was deployed aboard the USS Kirk as she switched home ports from San Diego to Japan. Shortly after our initial arrival in Yokosuka, we were ordered back to sea, on short notice, as part of the Midway battle group. We sailed around the Japanese mainland, into the Sea of Japan, E of Korea, within striking distance, after 2 US Army officers were killed near the DMZ in the "tree war". You may have been tuned out at the time but it was real to those of us involved.

https://www.wearethemighty.com/popular/ ... ge-crisis/

I'm betting many folks on this forum don't remember this. Those that do probably don't remember the desecration of the charred remains of these fallen service members. Chunks of them cut out with knives and held up as the Iranians smiled and laughed. Things have been sanitized today so people don't become upset. i wonder today if the mainstream media will show those heartbreaking pictures of the people jumping out of the towers. i remember the man and woman hand in hand as they fell to their deaths. Maybe we all need to be reminded what brutality looks like up close and personal.

I remember. That’s the incident OS finds humorous. Laughs at President Carter for sending them in. Those boys should have known there sand in the desert….too funny. They were trying to rescue a guy that actually lived in the house behind us…..But Jimmy is stupid.