Change the rules for the National Guard.?

How about we fix it so that in case of national emergency the guard goes FIRST
before the regular troops. Great idea huh? Think we would still get everyone
flocking to the National Guard in that case? I know Bush would have been first
in line to join up.. Right?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

How about we fix it so that in case of national emergency the guard goes
FIRST
before the regular troops. Great idea huh?

You been living under a rock or something? Guard troops have been in-theater
for these operations from the beginning. Infantry, engineers, transportation
and signal units--you name it. While some AC units were still stateside.

Think we would still get everyone
flocking to the National Guard in that case?

There has not been a draft since about 1973. You need to get out and read a
bit more; try to keep up with current events (or at least keep current
within three *decades*).

I know Bush would have been first
in line to join up.. Right?

Are you now claiming to possess a crystal ball, or the ability to read
peoples' minds?

Brooks


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany

(and apparently the last time you bothered to read a newspaper was while you
were over there...)

Subject: Change the rules for the National Guard.?
From: "Kevin Brooks"
Date: 2/19/04 11:45 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

How about we fix it so that in case of national emergency the guard goes
FIRST
before the regular troops. Great idea huh?

You been living under a rock or something? Guard troops have been in-theater
for these operations from the beginning. Infantry, engineers, transportation
and signal units--you name it. While some AC units were still stateside.

Think we would still get everyone
flocking to the National Guard in that case?

There has not been a draft since about 1973. You need to get out and read a
bit more; try to keep up with current events (or at least keep current
within three *decades*).

I know Bush would have been first
in line to join up.. Right?

Are you now claiming to possess a crystal ball, or the ability to read
peoples' minds?

Brooks


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany

(and apparently the last time you bothered to read a newspaper was while you
were over there...)




Then you agree the Guard goes first right?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Then you agree the Guard goes first right?

No more Vietnams.

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: Change the rules for the National Guard.?
From: "Kevin Brooks"
Date: 2/19/04 11:45 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

How about we fix it so that in case of national emergency the guard
goes
FIRST
before the regular troops. Great idea huh?

You been living under a rock or something? Guard troops have been
in-theater
for these operations from the beginning. Infantry, engineers,
transportation
and signal units--you name it. While some AC units were still stateside.

Think we would still get everyone
flocking to the National Guard in that case?

There has not been a draft since about 1973. You need to get out and read
a
bit more; try to keep up with current events (or at least keep current
within three *decades*).

I know Bush would have been first
in line to join up.. Right?

Are you now claiming to possess a crystal ball, or the ability to read
peoples' minds?

Brooks


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany

(and apparently the last time you bothered to read a newspaper was while
you
were over there...)




Then you agree the Guard goes first right?

Obviously you did not bother to even read the response; hardly surprising,
given the evidence of your failure to read anything regarding military
developments over the past thirty years or so.

Brooks



Arthur Kramer

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

Perhaps this will help:

"fudog50" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:12:47 -0500, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


You are a moron

ArtKramr wrote:

How about we fix it so that in case of national emergency the guard goes FIRST
before the regular troops. Great idea huh? Think we would still get everyone
flocking to the National Guard in that case? I know Bush would have been first
in line to join up.. Right?

I don't think people are exactly flocking to the Guard any more,
given the rather lengthy, and sometimes consecutive, or round-robin
deployments.

Not certain people in the Guard really expected to be used so hard.
There have been a few "freeloaders" who were happy to collect their
check from Uncle when it only meant a few days a month and a "summer
camp" for a couple weeks, but suddenly felt it unfair when ordered
to pack up and head out for the desert. Overall though, I think the
Guard units have held up very well, with really minimal griping that
one might expect from "citizen soldiers".

I don't think the Secret Service would let Bush sign up for the Guard
right now. But hey, Kerry has combat experience as an officer, and
decorations! He'd probably be in demand for the current exercise in
Middle East democracy building, no?


SMH

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
ArtKramr wrote:

How about we fix it so that in case of national emergency the guard goes
FIRST
before the regular troops. Great idea huh? Think we would still get
everyone
flocking to the National Guard in that case? I know Bush would have
been first
in line to join up.. Right?

I don't think people are exactly flocking to the Guard any more,
given the rather lengthy, and sometimes consecutive, or round-robin
deployments.

Not certain people in the Guard really expected to be used so hard.

Since when? Guard deployments have been on the upswing since ODS, with their
assumption of first the SFOR mission and more recently KFOR. The old days of
units never expecting to be mobilized have been long gone, even before the
events following 9-11. The tempo since 9-11 has probably been greater than
many thought before, but the Guard and Reserves as a whole were much more
cognizant of the possibility of being mobilized now than they were twenty
years ago, when the most they could usually expect was maybe a three-week AT
to facilitate their participation in OCONUS training operations instead of
the normal two weeks.

There have been a few "freeloaders" who were happy to collect their
check from Uncle when it only meant a few days a month and a "summer
camp" for a couple weeks, but suddenly felt it unfair when ordered
to pack up and head out for the desert.

The fact is that the units, when activated, end up invariable demonstrating
an extremely high rate of participation; very few folks are not showing (a
big no-no in legal regards, for which they will inevitably pay later). Most
Guardsmen I know have not been too unduly upset over a single
activation/deployment, though some have been a bit disgruntled over being
mobilized to perform duties well outside their normal specilaties (ie.,
engineer units deployed to CONUS or European locations to beef up post/base
security); the bigger problem that is arising is the low-density
specialties, where troops are looking at their second or third mobilizations
over a period of just a few years. These guys and gals knew what they were
getting into when they volunteered, but asking someone to do repeated six to
twelve month active duty periods begins to challenge the whole concept of
"reserve" or "part-time" duty obligation. Those that are most upset will not
reenlist after their enlistment is up--and that is their right, once they
have completed their service obligation. We feared a major loss of veteran
troops after ODS, but it never really came to pass, at least not at the
scale it could have.

Overall though, I think the
Guard units have held up very well, with really minimal griping that
one might expect from "citizen soldiers".

They are really little different (a bit older, but also demonstrating a
wider experience base) from their active duty counterparts; as has been
commented by various AC senior leaders who have Guard units serving under
them.

Brooks


I don't think the Secret Service would let Bush sign up for the Guard
right now. But hey, Kerry has combat experience as an officer, and
decorations! He'd probably be in demand for the current exercise in
Middle East democracy building, no?


SMH

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"fudog50" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:12:47 -0500, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


You are a moron

Kevin Brooks wrote:

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message

I don't think people are exactly flocking to the Guard any more,
given the rather lengthy, and sometimes consecutive, or round-robin
deployments.

Not certain people in the Guard really expected to be used so hard.

Since when? Guard deployments have been on the upswing since ODS, with their
assumption of first the SFOR mission and more recently KFOR. The old days of
units never expecting to be mobilized have been long gone, even before the
events following 9-11. The tempo since 9-11 has probably been greater than
many thought before, but the Guard and Reserves as a whole were much more
cognizant of the possibility of being mobilized now than they were twenty
years ago, when the most they could usually expect was maybe a three-week AT
to facilitate their participation in OCONUS training operations instead of
the normal two weeks.

This may be so, but I certainly don't recall some of these repeat
deployments that some individuals, and Guard units are doing. At
least around here (W. Mass.). It may be a seeming bias produced
by news coverage, where individual, and especially families of
individuals are complaining of the length of the duty call, and
sometimes repeat calls. Even Ft. Campbell in Kentucky had families
of (unit??) members publicly complaining about this, and I don't
believe these were reserve or Guard.

When you are in the Guard, I think you are still entitled to put
family and job related concerns at a higher level. That's the
way it's always been and GWI or not, seems that was the prevalent
thinking, at least around here (we have a combat engineer unit
locally for Army, and a Warthog unit for the air).

When you're regular, you know you are GI, and family and you take
second row seats when Uncle has need of you.


SMH