Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Navy agrees admiral was entitled to wear combat decorations
AP | June 25, 1998 | AP

Posted on 02/20/2003 10:55:17 AM PST by honway

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 last
To: BenR2
Staff Non Commissioned Officers: enlisted pay grades E-6 through E-9.
181 posted on 02/21/2003 8:12:25 AM PST by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: honway
I have heard that before.

I'll bet you have.

182 posted on 02/21/2003 8:14:19 AM PST by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: honway; BenR2
If you remove the "V" device story, there is no motivation for a Boorda "suicide".

See my #161. I believe ADM Boorda knew he been used as a tool by the Clintoons. He let the them walk all over him in the case of Tailhook and ADM Arthur. I think the "V" thing was just the straw that broke the camel's back.

BenR2-maybe I was too harsh on ADM Boorda and his not standing up to the politicians. Now that I think about it, maybe he stood up to them with his life.

183 posted on 02/21/2003 8:37:09 AM PST by GATOR NAVY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: honway
Nice summary of Clinton coincidences. You may want to add the coincidence about Ron Brown's plane crashing. During the worst storm of the decade, too.

Freegards
184 posted on 02/21/2003 9:46:18 AM PST by Tymesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: All
This in reply #153 is from ...

...The "V" is authorized for wear on these decorations if the award is for acts or services involving direct participation in combat operations. In all cases, the Combat Distinguishing Device may only be worn if specifically authorized in the citation

The passage quoted is from SECNAVINST 1650.1G, the Navy and Marine Corps Awards Manual, dated 7 January 2002.

The Awards Manual in effect in 1965 and 1973 did not contain the bold clause. This clause was added years later. Many sailors before this clause was added received Achievement and Commendation Medals with a V attached, even though the specific clause was not on the citation. The only requirement to have the clause added to the citation was to participate in combat operations during the service being recognized with the award.

Clearly Boorda was performing combat operations on a warship.This insistense that he did not earn a V because his citation did not include a clause that was added to the Awards Manual over a decade after he received the award is the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard.

I can believe the Clinton(depends on the defintion of "is") Administration would try to make this stick, what surprises me is that someone buys this argument.

Did anyone believe Clinton did "not have sex with that woman" before the blue dress?

185 posted on 02/21/2003 12:31:27 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Tymesup
Thanks. I hope it is enough for at least one person to ask, who is this former White House intern Mary Caitlin Mahoney and why was her death in a triple homicide 2.5 miles from the White House never reported nationally?
186 posted on 02/21/2003 12:38:41 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: SMEDLEYBUTLER
Staff Non Commissioned Officers: enlisted pay grades E-6 through E-9.

/ / / /
Thank you. (I was USAF.)
187 posted on 02/21/2003 7:06:22 PM PST by BenR2 ((John 3:16: Still True Today.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: GATOR NAVY
BenR2-maybe I was too harsh on ADM Boorda and his not standing up to the politicians. Now that I think about it, maybe he stood up to them with his life.


/ / / / /
Wow. What a thought! (Maybe that IS what happened.)
I was very scornful of ALL generals/admirals who served under Clinton, but an old retired Navy Chief friend of mine (who is wired in to the Navy world) truly mourned Boorda's passing -- and that forced me to rethink my view of "Mike."
188 posted on 02/21/2003 7:10:26 PM PST by BenR2 ((John 3:16: Still True Today.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson