[Arkie2]

According to the secretary of the Navy's document, the "authority of reference" this board was using in considering Mr. Kerry's record was "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163. "This section refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn't have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge.

[Mike Fieschko]

What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn't have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all.

Bad logic.

It wasn't the only possible point to reviewing his obligation.

There's 'up or out' (Lt Kerry not being promoted).

There's review of the Navy's personnel and skills needs.

An officer's obligation is open-ended, and the services routinely review officers training and specialties to see if those are what the service needs.