GWB and the Air Guard

Ed Rasimus wrote in message . ..

..

Excuse me son, but ANG units deployed regularly to SEA throughout the
conflict. In fact, at the time that GWB entered Guard service, there
were F-102 units deployed operationally in Vietnam and Thailand.
Several F-102s were lost during the war. Other ANG units experience
combat (and losses) in other aircraft types.

I don't think anyone disputes that. But how many were there?
CNN today (feel free to correct this) said that 8,000 National
guardsmen served in Vietnam in total. How many Americans in
total served there? How many National guardsmen during that
time did NOT go to Vietnam.

It remains a fact that a man who was 1-A and had a low lottery
number was a lot less likely to go to Vietnam if he joined the
Guard than if he didn't, unless he could get CO status.

--

FF

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
om...

It remains a fact that a man who was 1-A and had a low lottery
number was a lot less likely to go to Vietnam if he joined the
Guard than if he didn't, unless he could get CO status.


Yup. And what's wrong with that?

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
om...
Ed Rasimus wrote in message
. ..

..

Excuse me son, but ANG units deployed regularly to SEA throughout the
conflict. In fact, at the time that GWB entered Guard service, there
were F-102 units deployed operationally in Vietnam and Thailand.
Several F-102s were lost during the war. Other ANG units experience
combat (and losses) in other aircraft types.

I don't think anyone disputes that. But how many were there?
CNN today (feel free to correct this) said that 8,000 National
guardsmen served in Vietnam in total. How many Americans in
total served there? How many National guardsmen during that
time did NOT go to Vietnam.

I'd guess CNN is (again) wrong when it comes to things military. The total
number of Guardsmen mobilized was about twenty-three thousand (not including
previous and later volunteers for programs like Palace Alert), and the ARNG
alone sent over seven thousand personnel to Vietnam, either in units or as
individual fillers. I am not sure what the total manpower was for the ANG,
but with four ANG fighter squadrons (and their attendant support units from
their peacetime groups) in-country, and providing the bulk of the pilots for
another active component F-100 unit, we can safely assume it was well over
one thousand personnel. Not including the various Palace Alert personnel
rotations. And not including the numerous ANG/USAFR transport sorties into
the country.

Why do you focus on the issue of how many Guardsmen were mobilized or
deployed? The fact is that Guardsmen did serve in the conflict, from both
the air and ground sides. Folks like Bush had no say as to whether their
unit would be activated and deployed, or for that matter what kind of
aircraft their unit would fly or what its mission was. Is the isssue you are
concerned with relative danger? If so, I'd encourage you to tally up the
total number of US personnel who served in-country, or flew missions into
Vietnam from the immediate surroundings, throughout the conflict, and
balance that against the number of KIA. Then take a gander at the number of
fatalities sustained by single engine high performance jet pilots during
training/non-combat operations versus the number of such pilots, and tell us
which is higher. Based upon the comments from COL Campenni's letter to the
editor, I would not be surprised if the latter was just as dangerous as the
former when viewed against their respective total populations.


It remains a fact that a man who was 1-A and had a low lottery
number was a lot less likely to go to Vietnam if he joined the
Guard than if he didn't, unless he could get CO status.

After 1969 that was not necessarily true, courtesy of the Vietnamization
policy. I believe the ground force drawdown started really rolling in 1970,
and by the time of the NVA's '72 Easter Offensive the US ground presence was
pretty darned small.

Brooks


--

FF

It remains a fact that a man who was 1-A and had a low lottery
number was a lot less likely to go to Vietnam if he joined the
Guard than if he didn't, unless he could get CO status.

Or went to law school

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

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

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...

Or went to law school


Not after February 1968.

On 13 Feb 2004 11:44:10 -0800, (Fred the Red
Shirt) wrote:

Ed Rasimus wrote in message . ..

..

Excuse me son, but ANG units deployed regularly to SEA throughout the
conflict. In fact, at the time that GWB entered Guard service, there
were F-102 units deployed operationally in Vietnam and Thailand.
Several F-102s were lost during the war. Other ANG units experience
combat (and losses) in other aircraft types.

I don't think anyone disputes that. But how many were there?
CNN today (feel free to correct this) said that 8,000 National
guardsmen served in Vietnam in total. How many Americans in
total served there? How many National guardsmen during that
time did NOT go to Vietnam.

I don't have a number to refute that, but I'm fairly confident that
the number of guardsmen over the ten years of conflict that served in
Vietnam would greatly exceed 8,000.

One must also make very clear distinctions between AirNG and ArmyNG.
While the Army NG became almost notorious during the conflict, the
AirNG was flying a lot of airplanes in a lot of missions and
maintaining operational readiness.

How many did NOT go? How many Americans did NOT go? How many men did
NOT go? How many members of Congress did NOT go? What has that got to
do with anything?

It remains a fact that a man who was 1-A and had a low lottery
number was a lot less likely to go to Vietnam if he joined the
Guard than if he didn't, unless he could get CO status.

If a man was 1-A with a low lottery number he didn't need to join the
Guard. If a man were in college, he didn't go. If he were married, he
didn't go. If he did drugs and admitted it, he didn't go.

Fact is, it isn't cowardice or dodging to take a commission in the
ANG, go to UPT, fly single-seat, single engine fighters for several
years if you don't have to. It's a pretty commendable act.



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

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On 13 Feb 2004 11:44:10 -0800, (Fred the Red
Shirt) wrote:

Ed Rasimus wrote in message
. ..
I don't think anyone disputes that. But how many were there?
CNN today (feel free to correct this) said that 8,000 National
guardsmen served in Vietnam in total. How many Americans in
total served there? How many National guardsmen during that
time did NOT go to Vietnam.

I don't have a number to refute that, but I'm fairly confident that
the number of guardsmen over the ten years of conflict that served in
Vietnam would greatly exceed 8,000.

This sounds more like the number of casualties that were ARNG to me.


One must also make very clear distinctions between AirNG and ArmyNG.
While the Army NG became almost notorious during the conflict, the
AirNG was flying a lot of airplanes in a lot of missions and
maintaining operational readiness.

Explain that remark about being notorious?

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On 13 Feb 2004 11:44:10 -0800, (Fred the Red
Shirt) wrote:

Ed Rasimus wrote in message
. ..

..

Excuse me son, but ANG units deployed regularly to SEA throughout the
conflict. In fact, at the time that GWB entered Guard service, there
were F-102 units deployed operationally in Vietnam and Thailand.
Several F-102s were lost during the war. Other ANG units experience
combat (and losses) in other aircraft types.

I don't think anyone disputes that. But how many were there?
CNN today (feel free to correct this) said that 8,000 National
guardsmen served in Vietnam in total. How many Americans in
total served there? How many National guardsmen during that
time did NOT go to Vietnam.

I don't have a number to refute that, but I'm fairly confident that
the number of guardsmen over the ten years of conflict that served in
Vietnam would greatly exceed 8,000.

One must also make very clear distinctions between AirNG and ArmyNG.
While the Army NG became almost notorious during the conflict, the
AirNG was flying a lot of airplanes in a lot of missions and
maintaining operational readiness.

What is your beef with the ARNG side of the house? You might want to brush
up a bit regarding the record of the seven thousand plus *ARNG* troops who
deployed to Vietnam. There was one artillery unit from the KYARNG that lost
*eighteen* (IIRC) men in one day's fighting when the firebase it was
assigned to came under NVA ground attack--I'd suggest you be careful about
pointing out any such "clear distinctions" if you ever end up traveliing
through the Bluegrass State. My question to you would be, why did you feel
it was necessary to try and defame the ARNG in an effort to make the ANG
look better? IMO, both organizations accomplished the missions they were
given in that conflict.

Brooks

snip stuff I agree with

Ed Rasimus wrote in message . ..
On 13 Feb 2004 11:44:10 -0800, (Fred the Red
Shirt) wrote:

...
I don't think anyone disputes that. But how many were there?
CNN today (feel free to correct this) said that 8,000 National
guardsmen served in Vietnam in total. How many Americans in
total served there? How many National guardsmen during that
time did NOT go to Vietnam.

...

How many did NOT go? How many Americans did NOT go? How many men did
NOT go? How many members of Congress did NOT go? What has that got to
do with anything?

It is generally accepted by most folks who remember those years that
men joined the NG to avoid service in Vietnam. Here and there some
folks on this newsgroup argue that GWB in particular did not choose
the Air National Gurad to avoid being sent to Vietnam. If he had
WANTED to go to Vietnam as a pilot then it would ahve made sense
for him to enlist in the USAF or USN.

So I still stick to the notion that GWB chose the guard to avoid
being sent to Vietnam. That's why those numbers are meaningful.

If GWB did not want to go to Vietnam that's fine with me. My brother
didn't want to go, but his birthday was drawn last in the lottery
for his year. I didn't want to go, and they did not draft anyone
from my year. Neither one of us volunteered.

I see nothing wrong with avoiding service in Vietnam by whatever
legal means. I see nothing wrong with terminating one's tour of
duty in Vietnam by whatever legal means. That was how things
were back then.


It remains a fact that a man who was 1-A and had a low lottery
number was a lot less likely to go to Vietnam if he joined the
Guard than if he didn't, unless he could get CO status.

If a man was 1-A with a low lottery number he didn't need to join the
Guard. If a man were in college, he didn't go. If he were married, he
didn't go. If he did drugs and admitted it, he didn't go.


If he aws gay and admitted it he didn;t go. But weren't defferments
for college eventually discontinued (with existing ones grandfathered)?
I thought that was the basis for the 'unrest' on the college campuses.

--

FF

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 08:04:28 -0700, Ed Rasimus
wrote:

During that entire time,
you are on full time active duty and every time you kick the tires and
light the fire in a single-engine, single-seat Century Series jet, it
can kill you--all by itself without help from an enemy.

Nicely said. May I quote it?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

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