Anonymous
08/18/2024 18:23
Subject: She picked Tim
We still talking about trains? You guys must be fun at parties.
Anonymous
08/18/2024 18:13
Subject: She picked Tim
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Walz served in the military longer than any current sitting Member of Congress, longer than any current sitting Governor, and longer than any President since Eisenhower, and longer than any Vice President.
DP. You do understand that serving in the National Guard, when not activated, entails a substantially smaller time commitment than full-time service, right?
Don't care. Stop wasting everyone's time trying to attack Walz for his service.
No attack. What matters is what matters to those with whom he served.
No. Just matters to a handful of unprofessional, unethical MAGAs.
Anonymous
08/18/2024 17:55
Subject: She picked Tim
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Walz served in the military longer than any current sitting Member of Congress, longer than any current sitting Governor, and longer than any President since Eisenhower, and longer than any Vice President.
DP. You do understand that serving in the National Guard, when not activated, entails a substantially smaller time commitment than full-time service, right?
Don't care. Stop wasting everyone's time trying to attack Walz for his service.
No attack. What matters is what matters to those with whom he served.
Anonymous
08/18/2024 17:26
Subject: Re:She picked Tim
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“Light on the Right:” Ditch Deployment Dodgers
2014.
“Bro, is that an O6… with no combat patch???”
The question, asked by a good friend of mine who happens to be a former Ranger NCO, was whispered to me inside a fast-food restaurant just off post where we had stopped for lunch. I don’t think his tone could have been any more incredulous if he thought he had just seen Mat Best ride in on a purple unicorn while drinking a warm can of O’Doul’s.
The colonel in question was in ACUs, which, ironically, is the Army Combat Uniform, and was sporting a black colonel’s eagle in the center of his chest and a MEDDAC patch on his left sleeve. He wore no badges and no combat patch. It was stunning to an NCO like my friend, who had personally served multiple combat tours to Iraq and Afghanistan very early on in his career, that such a senior person had apparently never earned a combat patch by deploying even once in the 13+ years our nation has been at war.
For the uninitiated, an Army combat patch, or “shoulder sleeve insignia for wartime service,” (SSIFWTS) designates service in a combat zone and is considered by many if not most of the men and women in the Army to be one of the ultimate credentials of our profession. This is as it should be; if the mission of the Army is to fight and win our nations’ wars, then the credibility of any senior leader should be directly tied to how well he or she performed in combat conditions. This is especially true in today’s Army, which has been at war for more than 13 straight years.
Only, there are still a lot of people out there who have never served in combat. I’m not talking about lieutenants fresh out of West Point or non-commissioned officers still on their first enlistment who never got a chance to deploy. I’m talking SENIOR people. Field grade officers. Chief Warrant Officers. Senior NCOs. People who have been in 10, 15, or 20 years. Guys like the O6 my friend and I encountered.
Since that day at McDonald’s, I’ve noticed more and more senior people that are “light on the right” (not having a combat patch on their right sleeve). How the hell does something like this still go on, in 2014?
Had the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ended in 2004 or 2005, it would be understandable to see loads of field grade officers and senior NCOs without combat patches. The way our Army is set up, it can take a while for some people to get the opportunity to get into the fight. But the war has been going on for more than a dozen years and many Soldiers have multiple, lengthy tours in the two-way firing range. The Army even had to ease recruiting standards, offer massive bonuses, and institute a de-facto draft in the form of “stoploss” in order to keep enough people in uniform to satisfy the requirements of the GWOT and OCO. Yet some people managed to dodge all of that? Ten years ago being “light on the right” would have been OK for senior Army leaders. These days it’s not only unfathomable, it’s unconscionable.
https://havokjournal.com/culture/light-on-the-right-ditch-deployment-dodgers/
Agreed.
MANY soldiers serve their entire careers without being sent to the front lines. My dad served active duty enlisted in the Army, Air Defense Artillery for 21 years, honorable discharge as a Sergeant First Class. He had several deployments to Europe. Never served in combat. And no, not "connections" or anything sketchy. That's just how things often end up working out.
In fact it doesn't say much good about America if there's some expectation that every soldier gets sent into combat. We shouldn't be waging endless wars.
Was your dad active duty during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars?
Anonymous
08/18/2024 17:17
Subject: She picked Tim
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Walz served in the military longer than any current sitting Member of Congress, longer than any current sitting Governor, and longer than any President since Eisenhower, and longer than any Vice President.
DP. You do understand that serving in the National Guard, when not activated, entails a substantially smaller time commitment than full-time service, right?
Don't care. Stop wasting everyone's time trying to attack Walz for his service.
Anonymous
08/18/2024 17:15
Subject: Re:She picked Tim
Anonymous wrote:“Light on the Right:” Ditch Deployment Dodgers
2014.
“Bro, is that an O6… with no combat patch???”
The question, asked by a good friend of mine who happens to be a former Ranger NCO, was whispered to me inside a fast-food restaurant just off post where we had stopped for lunch. I don’t think his tone could have been any more incredulous if he thought he had just seen Mat Best ride in on a purple unicorn while drinking a warm can of O’Doul’s.
The colonel in question was in ACUs, which, ironically, is the Army Combat Uniform, and was sporting a black colonel’s eagle in the center of his chest and a MEDDAC patch on his left sleeve. He wore no badges and no combat patch. It was stunning to an NCO like my friend, who had personally served multiple combat tours to Iraq and Afghanistan very early on in his career, that such a senior person had apparently never earned a combat patch by deploying even once in the 13+ years our nation has been at war.
For the uninitiated, an Army combat patch, or “shoulder sleeve insignia for wartime service,” (SSIFWTS) designates service in a combat zone and is considered by many if not most of the men and women in the Army to be one of the ultimate credentials of our profession. This is as it should be; if the mission of the Army is to fight and win our nations’ wars, then the credibility of any senior leader should be directly tied to how well he or she performed in combat conditions. This is especially true in today’s Army, which has been at war for more than 13 straight years.
Only, there are still a lot of people out there who have never served in combat. I’m not talking about lieutenants fresh out of West Point or non-commissioned officers still on their first enlistment who never got a chance to deploy. I’m talking SENIOR people. Field grade officers. Chief Warrant Officers. Senior NCOs. People who have been in 10, 15, or 20 years. Guys like the O6 my friend and I encountered.
Since that day at McDonald’s, I’ve noticed more and more senior people that are “light on the right” (not having a combat patch on their right sleeve). How the hell does something like this still go on, in 2014?
Had the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ended in 2004 or 2005, it would be understandable to see loads of field grade officers and senior NCOs without combat patches. The way our Army is set up, it can take a while for some people to get the opportunity to get into the fight. But the war has been going on for more than a dozen years and many Soldiers have multiple, lengthy tours in the two-way firing range. The Army even had to ease recruiting standards, offer massive bonuses, and institute a de-facto draft in the form of “stoploss” in order to keep enough people in uniform to satisfy the requirements of the GWOT and OCO. Yet some people managed to dodge all of that? Ten years ago being “light on the right” would have been OK for senior Army leaders. These days it’s not only unfathomable, it’s unconscionable.
https://havokjournal.com/culture/light-on-the-right-ditch-deployment-dodgers/
Agreed.
MANY soldiers serve their entire careers without being sent to the front lines. My dad served active duty enlisted in the Army, Air Defense Artillery for 21 years, honorable discharge as a Sergeant First Class. He had several deployments to Europe. Never served in combat. And no, not "connections" or anything sketchy. That's just how things often end up working out.
In fact it doesn't say much good about America if there's some expectation that every soldier gets sent into combat. We shouldn't be waging endless wars.
Anonymous
08/18/2024 16:49
Subject: Re:She picked Tim
Tim Walz’s 2006 campaign falsely described details about his arrest for drunk driving in 1995
CNN
—
When Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz first ran for Congress in 2006, his campaign repeatedly made false statements about the details of his 1995 arrest for drunk and reckless driving.
According to court and police records connected to the incident, Walz admitted in court that he had been drinking when he was pulled over for driving 96 mph in a 55 mph zone in Nebraska. Walz was then transported by a state trooper to a local hospital for a blood test, showing he had a blood alcohol level of .128, well above the state’s legal limit of 0.1 at the time.
But in 2006, his campaign repeatedly told the press that he had not been drinking that night, claiming that his failed field sobriety test was due to a misunderstanding related to hearing loss from his time in the National Guard. The campaign also claimed that Walz was allowed to drive himself to jail that night.
None of that was true.
A CNN KFile review of statements made by the Walz campaign at the time reveals numerous discrepancies between how the campaign described the events and the facts of what actually took place that night.
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/15/politics/tim-walz-2006-campaign-falsely-described-dwi-kfile/index.html
CNN
—
When Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz first ran for Congress in 2006, his campaign repeatedly made false statements about the details of his 1995 arrest for drunk and reckless driving.
According to court and police records connected to the incident, Walz admitted in court that he had been drinking when he was pulled over for driving 96 mph in a 55 mph zone in Nebraska. Walz was then transported by a state trooper to a local hospital for a blood test, showing he had a blood alcohol level of .128, well above the state’s legal limit of 0.1 at the time.
But in 2006, his campaign repeatedly told the press that he had not been drinking that night, claiming that his failed field sobriety test was due to a misunderstanding related to hearing loss from his time in the National Guard. The campaign also claimed that Walz was allowed to drive himself to jail that night.
None of that was true.
A CNN KFile review of statements made by the Walz campaign at the time reveals numerous discrepancies between how the campaign described the events and the facts of what actually took place that night.
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/15/politics/tim-walz-2006-campaign-falsely-described-dwi-kfile/index.html
Anonymous
08/18/2024 16:42
Subject: She picked Tim
Anonymous wrote:Walz is a national treasure. A great role model for my son and men and dads and teachers.
Why?
Anonymous
08/18/2024 16:39
Subject: She picked Tim
Anonymous wrote:
Walz served in the military longer than any current sitting Member of Congress, longer than any current sitting Governor, and longer than any President since Eisenhower, and longer than any Vice President.
DP. You do understand that serving in the National Guard, when not activated, entails a substantially smaller time commitment than full-time service, right?
Anonymous
08/18/2024 16:39
Subject: Re:She picked Tim
“Light on the Right:” Ditch Deployment Dodgers
2014.
“Bro, is that an O6… with no combat patch???”
The question, asked by a good friend of mine who happens to be a former Ranger NCO, was whispered to me inside a fast-food restaurant just off post where we had stopped for lunch. I don’t think his tone could have been any more incredulous if he thought he had just seen Mat Best ride in on a purple unicorn while drinking a warm can of O’Doul’s.
The colonel in question was in ACUs, which, ironically, is the Army Combat Uniform, and was sporting a black colonel’s eagle in the center of his chest and a MEDDAC patch on his left sleeve. He wore no badges and no combat patch. It was stunning to an NCO like my friend, who had personally served multiple combat tours to Iraq and Afghanistan very early on in his career, that such a senior person had apparently never earned a combat patch by deploying even once in the 13+ years our nation has been at war.
For the uninitiated, an Army combat patch, or “shoulder sleeve insignia for wartime service,” (SSIFWTS) designates service in a combat zone and is considered by many if not most of the men and women in the Army to be one of the ultimate credentials of our profession. This is as it should be; if the mission of the Army is to fight and win our nations’ wars, then the credibility of any senior leader should be directly tied to how well he or she performed in combat conditions. This is especially true in today’s Army, which has been at war for more than 13 straight years.
Only, there are still a lot of people out there who have never served in combat. I’m not talking about lieutenants fresh out of West Point or non-commissioned officers still on their first enlistment who never got a chance to deploy. I’m talking SENIOR people. Field grade officers. Chief Warrant Officers. Senior NCOs. People who have been in 10, 15, or 20 years. Guys like the O6 my friend and I encountered.
Since that day at McDonald’s, I’ve noticed more and more senior people that are “light on the right” (not having a combat patch on their right sleeve). How the hell does something like this still go on, in 2014?
Had the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ended in 2004 or 2005, it would be understandable to see loads of field grade officers and senior NCOs without combat patches. The way our Army is set up, it can take a while for some people to get the opportunity to get into the fight. But the war has been going on for more than a dozen years and many Soldiers have multiple, lengthy tours in the two-way firing range. The Army even had to ease recruiting standards, offer massive bonuses, and institute a de-facto draft in the form of “stoploss” in order to keep enough people in uniform to satisfy the requirements of the GWOT and OCO. Yet some people managed to dodge all of that? Ten years ago being “light on the right” would have been OK for senior Army leaders. These days it’s not only unfathomable, it’s unconscionable.
https://havokjournal.com/culture/light-on-the-right-ditch-deployment-dodgers/
Agreed.
2014.
“Bro, is that an O6… with no combat patch???”
The question, asked by a good friend of mine who happens to be a former Ranger NCO, was whispered to me inside a fast-food restaurant just off post where we had stopped for lunch. I don’t think his tone could have been any more incredulous if he thought he had just seen Mat Best ride in on a purple unicorn while drinking a warm can of O’Doul’s.
The colonel in question was in ACUs, which, ironically, is the Army Combat Uniform, and was sporting a black colonel’s eagle in the center of his chest and a MEDDAC patch on his left sleeve. He wore no badges and no combat patch. It was stunning to an NCO like my friend, who had personally served multiple combat tours to Iraq and Afghanistan very early on in his career, that such a senior person had apparently never earned a combat patch by deploying even once in the 13+ years our nation has been at war.
For the uninitiated, an Army combat patch, or “shoulder sleeve insignia for wartime service,” (SSIFWTS) designates service in a combat zone and is considered by many if not most of the men and women in the Army to be one of the ultimate credentials of our profession. This is as it should be; if the mission of the Army is to fight and win our nations’ wars, then the credibility of any senior leader should be directly tied to how well he or she performed in combat conditions. This is especially true in today’s Army, which has been at war for more than 13 straight years.
Only, there are still a lot of people out there who have never served in combat. I’m not talking about lieutenants fresh out of West Point or non-commissioned officers still on their first enlistment who never got a chance to deploy. I’m talking SENIOR people. Field grade officers. Chief Warrant Officers. Senior NCOs. People who have been in 10, 15, or 20 years. Guys like the O6 my friend and I encountered.
Since that day at McDonald’s, I’ve noticed more and more senior people that are “light on the right” (not having a combat patch on their right sleeve). How the hell does something like this still go on, in 2014?
Had the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ended in 2004 or 2005, it would be understandable to see loads of field grade officers and senior NCOs without combat patches. The way our Army is set up, it can take a while for some people to get the opportunity to get into the fight. But the war has been going on for more than a dozen years and many Soldiers have multiple, lengthy tours in the two-way firing range. The Army even had to ease recruiting standards, offer massive bonuses, and institute a de-facto draft in the form of “stoploss” in order to keep enough people in uniform to satisfy the requirements of the GWOT and OCO. Yet some people managed to dodge all of that? Ten years ago being “light on the right” would have been OK for senior Army leaders. These days it’s not only unfathomable, it’s unconscionable.
https://havokjournal.com/culture/light-on-the-right-ditch-deployment-dodgers/
Agreed.
Anonymous
08/18/2024 16:28
Subject: She picked Tim
Anonymous wrote:
Walz served in the military longer than any current sitting Member of Congress, longer than any current sitting Governor, and longer than any President since Eisenhower, and longer than any Vice President.
Yet never had a combat deployment. hmmm.
Anonymous
08/18/2024 16:22
Subject: She picked Tim
Walz served in the military longer than any current sitting Member of Congress, longer than any current sitting Governor, and longer than any President since Eisenhower, and longer than any Vice President.
Anonymous
08/18/2024 16:14
Subject: She picked Tim
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Jd is no longer in the military so did he abandon his troops?? I'm just really confused when someone can actually retire and get out of the military without it being abandonment?
My uncle retired after 20 years in the national guard to go to private sector. Many of his colleagues stayed in the service and are lifelong servicemen. He is still Friends with them to this day and never once have I ever thought he deserted his troop.
So are the Republicans saying once you enter the service you must also die in the service?? Because I thought those were suckers?
Did your uncle retire when his unit was under a deployment warning order and then not correct people when they thanked him for his service on the battlefield? Did he claim that he carried weapons of war when he was deployed to Italy?
- Walz submitted his retirement paperwork late 2004
- Walz announced he was running for Congress in February 2005
- Walz filed with the FEC in February 2005
- His unit didn't get its first notice of a possible Iraq deployment until March 17 2005 - AFTER Walz already filed his paperwork, AFTER Walz already started running for Congress
- Walz was retired from the Guard May 2005
- His unit didn't get its official deployment notice until June 2005
- His unit didn't deploy until March 2006, more than 18 months after Walz filed retirement paperwork and 10 months after he had already retired
Trying to claim he "suddenly abandoned his unit when they received deployment notice" doesn't add up.
Anyone claiming otherwise lacks basic calendar proficiency.
The chaplain of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s field artillery regiment said there is no excuse for the Democratic VP pick to have abandoned his National Guard unit before a critical deployment — not even running for Congress.
“In our world, to drop out after a WARNORD [warning order] is issued is cowardly, especially for a senior enlisted guy,” retired Capt. Corey Bjertness, now a pastor in Horace, North Dakota, told The Post.
Bjertness, 61, was the chaplain for the 1st Battalion, 125th Field Artillery, of which Walz was command sergeant major before retiring in 2005, two months before the unit deployed to Iraq. Walz has said he did so to run for Congress, and he was elected the next year.
“Running for Congress is not an excuse,” Bjertness said of Walz’s decision to quit. “I stopped everything and went to war. I left my wife with three teenagers and a 6-year-old and I was gone for 19 months.”
Thomas Behrends, the command sergeant major who replaced Walz, previously told The Post of the Minnesota governor: “He had the opportunity to serve his country, and said ‘Screw you’ to the United States.”
Bjertness added that leaving his troops at such a critical time was irresponsible of Walz, who served for more than two decades with the Army National Guard in Nebraska and Minnesota.
“That means that a new master sergeant needs to come in and to get to know everyone. Their task is to keep everyone safe and healthy,” the pastor said
https://nypost.com/2024/08/09/us-news/chaplain-calls-tim-walz-cowardly-for-leaving-national-guard/
As shown in the timeline above, he submitted his retirement paperwork MONTHS before there was a WARNORD and he announced his candidacy for Congress and filed with the FEC BEFORE there was a WARNORD and he was RETIRED FROM THE GUARD for an entire TEN MONTHS before they deployed.
Stop with this inane nonsense and learn how to understand how time works. You people are stupid for continuing this dysfunctional, illogical, calendar-illiterate garbage.
Got it? You look like idiots. No "yabut so-and-so said..." Enough already. You look like idiots.
Anonymous
08/18/2024 16:10
Subject: She picked Tim
This is the dumbest response to anything on an anonymous Internet forum. This is not a dissertation. People are expressing opinions.
Anonymous