Change the rules for the National Guard.?

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?

Arthur Kramer



Well Art, If we need to get bombers there fast I guess the Guard will
have to be first, since as far as I know, they are the folks who fly the
B1B.


Dave

"Dave Holford" 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?

Arthur Kramer



Well Art, If we need to get bombers there fast I guess the Guard will
have to be first, since as far as I know, they are the folks who fly the
B1B.

Actually, that is not correct. The Guard *had* two B-1B outfits (Kansas and
Georgia ANG units, accounting for only a small portion of the total Bone
force), but they lost them a year or two back when the Bone force was cut
back and they retired the earliest production aircraft. One of those units
(from the GAANG) has instead become a "blended wing", with both AC and NG
personnel, and flies the E-8 JSTARS (another early deployer). The only RC
bomb unit still flying is a USAFR B-52 squadron.

Brooks



Dave

After Vietnam the Guard and Reserve were deliberately given missions that
made it IMPOSSIBLE to have a medium to major scale war without significant
callups.

Just so. Take civil affairs, for example. During the 1980s, there was
no civil affairs unit in the U.S. Army. I believe the same was
(perhaps is) true of chemical warfare. The army got rid of these
specialist jobs to the guard, just as it got rid of KP to civilian
contractors.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 06:03:36 +0900, "Ragnar"
wrote:

What happened to not posting OT political crap, Art?

Art seems to have lost his sense of perspective, some little time ago.
I kill-filed him because of one of his rants.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
news

After Vietnam the Guard and Reserve were deliberately given missions that
made it IMPOSSIBLE to have a medium to major scale war without
significant
callups.

Just so. Take civil affairs, for example. During the 1980s, there was
no civil affairs unit in the U.S. Army. I believe the same was
(perhaps is) true of chemical warfare. The army got rid of these
specialist jobs to the guard, just as it got rid of KP to civilian
contractors.

There were indeed chemical units in the AC during the 80's. One chem company
was assigned to each division; our seperate brigade a a smaller detachment
level organization. Focus for these units was on decon and smoke. Likewise,
while some 96% of the CA force was found in the USAR, there has indeed been
an AC unit in the structure--at one time it was the 95th CA Group, which was
stood down in the early seventies and replaced by the 96th CA Battalion at
Bragg, where it has been based ever since then, now under ARSOC.

Brooks


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

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

Subject: Change the rules for the National Guard.?
From: Stephen Harding
Date: 2/20/04 7:32 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

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



The guard is where you go when you don't want to go to war but want everyone to
think that you do. End of story.


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

On 20 Feb 2004 16:24:32 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:


The guard is where you go when you don't want to go to war but want everyone to
think that you do. End of story.


Arthur Kramer

You're not paying attention, Art. The Guard and Reserves today (that's
TODAY!!!) are very much a part of active operations. Joining the Guard
or Reserve has, for the last twenty or more years meant a very serious
obligation and a very real expectation that you will be in harm's way.

Things change over time and what might have been true long ago in a
galaxy far, far away is not necessarily still the fact.

You might also want to consider editing several hundred lines of
assembled previous thread messages, particularly when appending
non-sequitur, one-liners ala-Tarver. It makes scrolling so much less
tedious particularly for those of us who don't spontaneously kill-file
folks who often contribute good stuff.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: Change the rules for the National Guard.?
From: Stephen Harding
Date: 2/20/04 7:32 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

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



The guard is where you go when you don't want to go to war but want
everyone to
think that you do. End of story.

You are truly a disgusting, sad sack of horse excrement. Here are a few of
the DoD's press releases regarding the deaths of deployed Guardsmen and
Reservists over just the past couple of weeks:

http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/...0217-0348.html

http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/...0217-0351.html

http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/...0210-0339.html

http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/...0209-0335.html

Each of these folks gave a hell of a lot more than you did, despite your
repeated crowing about your own exploits. Care to visit their next of kin
and make that claim? Open a book, read a newspaper--just get a freakin'
clue, you sanctimonious SOB. Guardsmen from a single brigade deployed from
Florida had received over forty Purple Hearts in Iraq as of November; how
many did YOU get?

Brooks



Arthur Kramer

Art wrote:
The guard is where you go when you don't want to go to war but want everyone
to
think that you do. End of story.

Art,
That was uncalled for and unmitigated Bull****!
I will grant you that at one time the State Militias were sort of "Old Boys
Clubs" and a place to go drink beer during summer camp, but that has not always
been the case. It is not the case now.
Times change and most people keep up with them, you do not.
By the way, the Guard was activated for WWII (your war, remember it?) before
you even got out of high school. The Guard was taking casualties long before
you got in the nose compartment of Willie and saved the world from the evil
Hun.
You owe some people an apology for that crack.

Rick Clark
Oxmoron1