Posted on 09/12/2004 12:30:03 PM PDT by TheDivineRightOfLifesScum
The service question
A review of President Bush's Guard years raises issues about the time he served
By Kit R. Roane
Last February, White House spokesman Scott McClellan held aloft sections of President Bush's military record, declaring to the waiting press that the files "clearly document the president fulfilling his duties in the National Guard." Case closed, he said.
But last week the controversy reared up once again, as several news outlets, including U.S. News, disclosed new information casting doubt on White House claims.
A review of the regulations governing Bush's Guard service during the Vietnam War shows that the White House used an inappropriate--and less stringent--Air Force standard in determining that he had fulfilled his duty. Because Bush signed a six-year "military service obligation," he was required to attend at least 44 inactive-duty training drills each fiscal year beginning July 1. But Bush's own records show that he fell short of that requirement, attending only 36 drills in the 1972-73 period, and only 12 in the 1973-74 period. The White House has said that Bush's service should be calculated using 12-month periods beginning on his induction date in May 1968. Using this time frame, however, Bush still fails the Air Force obligation standard.
Moreover, White House officials say, Bush should be judged on whether he attended enough drills to count toward retirement. They say he accumulated sufficient points under this grading system. Yet, even using their method, which some military experts say is incorrect, U.S. News 's analysis shows that Bush once again fell short. His military records reveal that he failed to attend enough active-duty training and weekend drills to gain the 50 points necessary to count his final year toward retirement.
The U.S. News analysis also showed that during the final two years of his obligation, Bush did not comply with Air Force regulations that impose a time limit on making up missed drills. What's more, he apparently never made up five months of drills he missed in 1972, contrary to assertions by the administration. White House officials did not respond to the analysis last week but emphasized that Bush had "served honorably."
Some experts say they remain mystified as to how Bush obtained an honorable discharge. Lawrence Korb, a former top Defense Department official in the Reagan administration, says the military records clearly show that Bush "had not fulfilled his obligation" and "should have been called to active duty."
Bush signed his commitment to the Texas Air National Guard on May 27, 1968, shortly after becoming eligible for the draft. In his "statement of understanding," he acknowledged that "satisfactory participation" included attending "48 scheduled inactive-duty training periods" each year. He also acknowledged that he could be ordered to active duty if he failed to meet these requirements.
Slump. Bush's records show that he did his duty for much of the first four years of his commitment. But as the Vietnam War wound down, his performance slumped, and his attendance at required drills fell off markedly. He did no drills for one five-month period in 1972. He also missed his flight physical. By May 2, 1973, his superiors said they could not evaluate his performance because he "has not been observed."
Albert C. Lloyd Jr., a retired Air Force colonel who originally certified the White House position that Bush had completed his military obligation, stood by his analysis. After a reporter cited pertinent Air Force regulations from the period, he complained that if the entire unit were judged by such standards, "90 percent of the people in the Guard would not have made satisfactory participation."
Some other experts disagree. "There is no 'sometimes we have compliance and sometimes we don't,' " says Scott Silliman, a retired Air Force colonel and Duke University law professor. "That is a nonsensical statement and an insult to the Guard to suggest it."
The regulations must be followed, adds James Currie, a retired colonel and author of an official history of the Army Reserve. "Clearly, if you were the average poor boy who got drafted and sent into the active force," he says, "they weren't going to let you out before you had completed your obligation."
Apologies if this has been posted already, I searched for it and found nothing.
His performance "could not be observed" because he was doing his drills in Alabama. Lt. Col. Calhoun, who worked in the safety office with Bush in Alabama, explained this on Fox News. He said that was a standard practice on evaluations if the person being evaluated did his service elsewhere.
______________
You are correct that Kerry originally executed a 3/2
agreement which would have ended his active commissioned
service in DEC69 and begun a 2 year drilling obligation
ending DEC71, but notice that the agreement says it
remains in effect unless superceded by other orders.
Kerry's silver bullet propelling him out of VietNam, BUPERS
msg dtg 202117ZMAR69, ordering him to COMSTSLANT
Broolyn New York for duty as an admiral's aide, extended
his active duty to 31APR71 as a condition of the transfer.
Between the receipt of these ofders and their execution,
Kerry was able to negotiate this down to an extention on
active duty to 31AUG70, giving him 4 years active
commissioned service and relieving him of the drilling
obligation.
See his Officer Order Memoranda, page 4 of 4: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Office_Order_Memos.pdf
Once at COMSTSLANT, Kerry successfully requested an
early out from this extension effective 3JAN70 without
incurring any other obligation. Slick.
He was released from active duty effective 2400 3JAN70
and transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR),
a non-drilling, non-payed status.
I noticed that they are always referring to 'Air Force' personnel when claiming 'rules and regulations' are being broken, NOT 'Air National Guard' personnel, where quite a few 'rules and regulations' are bent all of the time.
Thanks
My hubby spent almost 6 years on active duty (flying C-124's, a 'Nam era transport a/k/a "Old Shaky") and an additional 18 years in an ANG unit flying tankers and retired as a LTC. The entire time in the guard he attended drill weekends if it matched up with his real job schedule as an airline pilot. When he c/n attend drill he made up the time flying when he could--this is the case with most pilots in the ANG, no matter what their civilian job. On occasion he c/n even do make-up drill.
The regulations must be followed, adds James Currie, a retired colonel and author of an official history of the Army Reserve. "Clearly, if you were the average poor boy who got drafted and sent into the active force," he says, "they weren't going to let you out before you had completed your obligation."
As far as this colonel is concerned I say--BITE ME! The 'flyboys'are a rare breed, they make their own rules, and always have to some degree. I ought to know, I've been married to the same one for 43 years!
This is a summary of their position: Bush disobeyed no orders, met all requirements to the satisfaction of his superiors, and was given an honorable discharge. What US "News" evidently expected was GWB to say "excuse me fellas, but you shouldn't let me out just yet - I owe a few months of drills and standing around - (since he was not continuing on, what would he be doing? Drill on the tarmac? Doing inventory? Seriously. It is kind of embarrassing for everyone when you have a jet jock but no plane time to put him in.) With active duty and career guys returning, there was nothing for GWB to do - his officers were probably happy if he wasn't around - one less person to find busywork for.
This whole story and its little extensions like this one is so non-newsworthy. How many articles about draft dodging did they run when Clinton ran? The only reason for this story has to be an orchestrated thematic attack. Not that I respected that "news" magazine anyway.
Diva's Husband
*** Clearly, if you were the average poor boy who got drafted and sent into the active force ***
the class envy card ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.