quote:

"Doc". Thanks again for your service.

You are welcome, brother.


.

Not an observation from a Troop. But someone who is boots on the ground:


August 29, 2007
Op-Ed Columnist
Watch the Sunni Tribes
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Baquba, Iraq

When U.S. Army officers try to explain the challenge of rebuilding Iraq, they often talk about the three different time pieces they're working with: Washington's is a stop watch, where every second longer we stay in Iraq is a problem; the Iraqi Shiite-led government's watch often seems broken, and you have to regularly tap it to get it to work; and the Iraqi Sunni watch always wants to go in reverse — back to Saddam's day, when Sunnis were in charge.

I've just bounced between Baquba and Balad and a Sunni and Shiite neighborhood in Baghdad as an embedded reporter with the visiting Adm. William Fallon, head of the Central Command. I don't know whether the surge is working — too early, too short a visit. But I did see something new here, which, if played right, could help to stabilize Iraq and better synchronize some of those watches.

It's this: the willingness of the Sunni tribes, and key Sunni neighborhood leaders in Baghdad, to work side by side with the American soldiers they've been shooting at for four years in order to retake Sunni towns and districts from the Taliban-like, pro-Al Qaeda Iraqi Sunnis who took charge in 2006, when the undermanned United States forces pulled out of many areas and handed over security to unprepared Iraqi Army units.

Ironically, a key reason violence appears to be trending lower here is because Al Qaeda's "surge" in 2006 so frightened Iraq's more moderate, occasionally whisky-drinking Sunni tribal leaders — the backbone of the Sunni community here — that they became willing to work with the Americans just when the U.S. surge was taking off.

Warning! This important shift by the Sunni tribes could come unglued if the Shiite-led Iraqi government doesn't start providing government services — water, fuel and electricity — to the Sunni areas the tribes have retaken.

It could also come apart because, well, this is Iraq. As one U.S. general said to me of the Sunni tribes, "They still hate us. They just hate Al Qaeda even more right now and they hate the Persians even more than them. But they could turn their guns back on us anytime."

Baquba, in the heart of Diyala Province, north of Baghdad, is a microcosm of what happened. Last March, as the U.S. military was trying to retake this region from Iraqi jihadists — who had declared it the capital of "The Islamic State of Iraq" and imposed a reign terror, including beheadings for un-Islamic behavior, restrictions on women's dress and a ban on smoking and alcohol — a U.S. intelligence drone picked up fighting between two Iraqi factions inside the city.

The next day, one of those factions, representing local Sunni tribes, asked a U.S. field officer for help in evicting the Islamic extremists. Thus began a cooperative endeavor that now embraces virtually all 25 Sunni and Shiite tribes in the area, and has the U.S. paying the tribes' sons to be neighborhood patrols in their own towns and villages. As a result, Baquba's market, which was sealed shut three months ago, was jammed on Sunday with women shopping for cucumbers, tomatoes and figs at different stalls and men making copies of documents at sidewalk Xerox machines.

Meanwhile, the U.S. forces also brought the official Iraqi Army back into Baquba — only this time with a new division commander — Maj. Gen. Salim Karim Salih, a respected, retired Sunni Army officer, who was one of Saddam's top generals in the Iran-Iraq war and whose home was nearby. He, too, was ready to work with the Americans to get rid of the pro-Al Qaeda Iraqis.

"The citizens asked me to come back," he told me. "We need a political solution. But the politics has to be impartial and not just favor one side. And we need action not more words." That is code for the Shiite-led central government sending money to help repair the town, which it has started to do. "We are in a disaster state now," added the governor of Diyala Province, Ra'ad al-Tamimi. "We hope the central government will interact with us in a better way."

I understand the Shiite's reticence. The Sunnis have resisted everything for four years and now they want government services.

But it is in our interest, because it increases the chances of the only possible solution here, and that is a loose federation in which each sect controls its own areas and Baghdad serves as an oil-funded A.T.M., dispensing cash proportionally.

That is the only way we can get out of here without Iraq exploding. Or, as a Kurdish official said to me: "If you wanted a united Iraq, you never should have gotten rid of Saddam, because he was the only one who could hold this place together."

If I may, I would like to interject something here. I have an underlying question with regard to the authors of this article. I also applies across the board to the "troops" stationed abroad on the front lines. I have my own experience to draw from but it seems to fit very well.

When evaluating the veracity or accuracy of the claims made by these folks, the question needs to be asked: who is making these observations with regard to the troops and their lack of enthusiasm for their deployment? In other words, are they "professionals" or are they the "weekend warriors"?

Before I get pounced on for my statement, I am not quesioning anyone's patriotism or loyalty to the mission. But the professionalism plays a key role in the issue.

'Professionals' are, to me, those of us who volunteered and became members of the REGULAR component of the Navy, Marine Corps, Army, Air Force or Coast Guard. The 'weekend warriors' are those who have made a commitment to the RESERVE components and the MILITIA (defined in 10 U.S.C., Section 311 as the National Guard). This is an important point to be made because we 'professionals' spent our time, 24/7/365 preparing for deployment, training for deployment and deploying according to the "Needs of the service".

Our non-professional brothers and sisters, however, worked and lived in the civilian world until they were called to augment the regular components or were "federalized". Their prep for deployment is a weekend a month and two weeks a year. But when the call came, they were removed from the comfort they know and directed to proceed to a place, whether they liked it or not, where comfort is a pair of boots under your head for a pillow.

They left loved ones behind. A good, high paying job and venues for the routine that included fine dining in some cases and companionship from pets, family and friends. The professionals, however, are already accustomed to the routine of family separation and deployment on a moment's notice. To the professional, deployment is only a change of scenery for the duty station. In other words, professionals accept deployment, the separation and the needs of the mission much more readily and easily than the augmentees.

this plays significantly on the morale of the troops as the professionals are with shipmates and teammates they already know quite intimately, whereas the augmentees often are sent to fill a vacant role and may not know the personnel with whom they may bivouac. So their morale slips and they become disenchanted with the mission. They make the most noise because the professionals don't really see a problem. They are just doing another day's job.

Anyway, that is my evaluation. It is a lot easier for the left to exploit this disenchantment and paint it as demoralization of the troops when it is not anything more than homesickness for those who are not accustomed to the toll on the lives of Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coasties.

If you wonder about my experience, I spent time with Surgical Team One, who deployed to the Persian Gulf in 1987 without any real lead time. We were all professionals, but we sucked it up and said, "Great, we get to collect hostile fire, sea and family separation pay. And we can save some money and get souvenirs." That is how we viewed our rapid deployment in support of Operation Earnest Will after we were taken from our parent command and flown to the Middle East. I believe it is a big part of the perceived morale problem of the troops.

What do you think? Have a fine Navy day.

I think you have no clue what you are talking about and it embarrasses me that you would call those who are in the RF non-professional.

I have been on both sides of the fence. the relative comfort you talk about counts for every no combat base in the world CONUS or OCONUS. Even active folk ahve to leave their pets friends and loved ones, comfotable housing, and fine dining.

Beyond our weekend a month and 2 weeks(usually more and much of it for free for the senior folk) a year we spent 6 months predeployment tightening up any rusty spots. And yes we are professionals accustomed and ready to deploy. It is also just a change of scenery.

So you went on one deployment. What makes you say you were accustomed to such deployements if you only did it once? Many I worked with were there in 91 and some have had multiple deployments in the latest one. It seems they are more ready for it than your one time. I have been in a full time garrison military and it is not that much different than what we have as a civilian. I have seen fewer soldier who would not report in the RF than those AD who went AWOL so as not to deploy.

You see us as lesser because you and your shipmates new each other better? How long did you work together. Did you work together for 10 or more years as much of the RF does? when I was active, duty stations chaged every 2 to 3 years so you get only 1/3 of the time to work together and get to know one another. Most are not augmentees (which the AD has as well) but units that have trained together for years and deploy as a unit. Morale was high while we were deployed.

What do I think? I think you are a fool who spouts off without any clue. You call yourself a professional while denigrating your brothers and sisters in arms. I do not think professional applies to you.

You are currenly working on your degree, but many RF soldiers already have their degrees. do you not think that makes up more ready for our jobs? Most of us did one or more active before joining the RF. I did 22 years as a professional, 4 active, 6 reserve and 12 guard.

Actually, I did five deployments. Only one into a hostile fire zone before desert shield. All of my deployments were rapid deployments. If that clears something up for you, then that is fine. I have no quarrel with you personally. But if you think that an attack on my knowledge and experience discredits them, then you are sorely mistaken.

Having deployed with surgical team one, and the Marine Corps as a consequence, has given me a perspective that you may lack. Have you ever humped Camp Pendleton? I have. Have you every shared meals with Thai Marines in the jungle? I have. Do not presume to judge me or my experience just because you disagree with me. My point is that professional servicemen and women do far more training and preparing than Guardsmen and Reservists do. That is undeniable. It is what we do.

By the way, I was in the United States Navy as a Hospital Corpsman for fourteen years in the Regular component. No reserve time. And I have served with reservists and guardsmen. So I do know a thing or two about it.

And I have had my Associates degree for nearly 20 years and my BS for 13.

And if you have the ability to read then you would have read that I was making a distiction regarding perspectives. Don't ever call someone a fool without looking your foolishness in the face yourself. You are an even bigger fool at that time.

My time in the Navy predates what is on your profile. So do not start some nonsense that you know nothing about. If you are offended, then that is your problem. We never complained. My time in the ME was in 87. I had four deployments at sea before that. You are "spouting off" about issues you refuse to acknowledge.

What military job did you work for the 18 years you did in the reserves and guard? How did you spend 24/7/365 preparing for deployment, the mission of ALL servicemembers, if you did not have a military job? It is you who has no clue. You think those stripes give you a pass to pee on those of us who made regular daily sacrifices to allow you to remain in your world of self importance. It does not. What sacrifices did you make? Did you retire from the reserves? Do you get military benefits or do you have to wait until you are 65 to collect them.

Your time would be better spent doing a self assessment and determining why you are so offended by my (and many others') opinions regarding this matter. It is just that I have happened to say it when others may be afraid of offending someone.

That being said, I hope you have a good day. Contrary to what you may believe, I do not hold you in low esteem. Quite the contrary. Anyone in the uniformed services has my highest regard. What you make of it is on you.

By the way, according to Navy Regulations, reserve component members AUGMENT the regular component. That makes them augmentees. I am sure it is the same in the Army and Air Force.

Here is just some light reading regarding augmentation by the reserve components of the active duty ranks. Hope this clears the air on that issue.

http://www.usmc.mil/directiv.nsf/82001916d226893285256d...E/MCO%201001.45G.pdf

http://www.usmc.mil/directiv.nsf/9d816d546727ed74852565...E/MCO%201130.80A.pdf

http://www.navyleague.org/sea_power/almanac_jan_02_17.php

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/testimony/personnel/cotton050413.pdf

http://www.tradoc.army.mil/tpubs/regs/r140-3.pdf

http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/dclm/linkedtextchapters/CHAPTER7.pdf

PETE CDR;

I understand what you are saying and don't see it as a slam against any one in the reserves. The dislocation they feel especially if they get "extended" either in country or to augment supply on return is a severe hardship on them and their families when it happens because lets face it most of the young people signed up and didn't "really " believe they would be called up I saw this with several of the younger guys I worked with when this all started.

And!! When I was active in the sixties they would sometimes penalize guys who had missed too many training sessions and force them to do 6 months active duty to make up for it.......man if you want to hear some****ing you should have heard that.

In fairness a huge percentage of them don't complain they just answer the call but there is a larger percentage of them than regulars that are dissilusioned as you said, and also as you said, it is understandable, I didn't think you were slamming anybody.......Just my H.O.

Be well, Tawodi...out

Thanks a bunch, Tawodi. And thanks for weathering the storm of the Nam during your tenure. My hat is off to you and yours for keeping the faith in the mission even when it was not popular. Take care of yourself. Prayers are with you. Doc Commander

All questioned was your professionalism, you were the one who attacked thousands of service members knowledge and experience and then whined when you think yours was called to question. I only went of what you listed as your experience.

Yes I have humped Camp Pendleton, ever hump camp Roberts? No I have not eaten with thai Marines, ever eat with Iraqi soldiers or police? ever sit freezing in a tank in the dead of winter on the Gulda Gap? We can go *** for tat on what we have done. My point is that professional servicemebers train for their jobs. Some do it full time military some part time military, but what makes you think we donot also train in the civilian world? My military electronics training (4 MOS's) was augmented by a civilian electronics degree and real world experience. I was able to do things that were never taught in a military school. Do you not think you could have benifited by working in a major metropolitan hospital for 14 years in addition to your military training prior to deployment?

As for training 24/7/365 you know that is an exagerration. Yes you were military that whole period but not training. Maybe half of that when you count sleep, time off, liberty, leave, KP, guard duty and many other things like painting the barracks (or rocks for that matter), police call, cleaning the head, etc etc.

You want to call me non professional then yes I will call you a fool.

As for an augmentee, the last trip I took was in Bde HQ where we were in charge of two Active Bns and one Guard Bn, but that is different than what you said before as individuals filling vacancies to work with people they do not know.

Yes, I have eaten with Iraqis. And Iranians. I never attacked anyone. If you took it that way, then you are being a little sensitive. I have been all over the Pacific. But, dang, you got me. I am humbled in your presence. I have never been in a tank. I guess that the majority of sailors, even Corpsmen, should be humbled by you, Sarge.

As for *** for tat, my medical training after Hospital Corps school was with a civilian University - Creighton University. And those were straight degrees, actual classroom time, not augmented by military or naval training.

And, actually, my coworkers and I went into business for ourselves in South Texas and staffed a medical center in a major corporation. Upon receipt of TAD orders, though, we suspended our end of operations and did our duty. The work was after hours and did not conflict with our military duty.

And, no, training and readiness 24/7/365 is not an exaggeration. Being C-1 status (highest readiness classification) is of paramount importance. Staying in MOPP gear for 18 hours in the hot sun is no joke either. As you say, we can go on and on. I think you are being overly sensitive and missing the point. Others apparently got it, but you missed it. Read the above posts for pretty darn good clarification. It seems you have a bit of a problem and I'm not it.

I do not concede any point with you because I feel you are the fool. You have called my out on my professionalism when that wasn't even the point. I have also not responded in kind, other than to indicate that the fool thinks others foolish.

I do not believe you are in the spirit of debate or discussion. I think you have a problem. I don't know what it is.

My only point to you is that the 18 years after your release from active duty was not "professional soldiering". I cannot dispute that your four years of active duty was. But when you choose to become a reservist or militiaman, then you are not a professional soldier any longer. Your priorities change and your livelihood does too.

If you have a problem with that, then, again that is on you. And, yes, that is precisely what the primary mission of the reserve is - to augment the regular components when necessary. Here is a citation in federal law for you:

Title 10, United States Code.

"§ 10102. Purpose of reserve components
The purpose of each reserve component is to provide trained units and qualified persons available for active duty in the armed forces, in time of war or national emergency, and at such other times as the national security may require, to fill the needs of the armed forces whenever more units and persons are needed than are in the regular components."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_sec...0010102----000-.html

As a MSGT, I would expect you to be well aware of that. That is not demeaning your service or rank. It is an inquiry as to your familiarity with federal law.

Also, through 14 years of active duty service in the regular component, I have cleaned my share of heads and done other tasks. To include washing the blood off my uniform when a sailor, Marine, soldier or airman suffered a serious wound. My last task in the PG was to treat a young Army SGT on the barge Hercules. The barge took a swell and threw him into the rotors of a launching helo. It denuded the top of his head and even avulsed some of his skull. That was a 0200 local when I was awakened from my sleep. My team was due to leave USS Okinawa later that morning. Our travel plans were suspended for that. Since I was the respiratory guy for the team, it fell on me to do the life support.

I wasn't there when he came to in Rammstein at the base hospital some months later. My team never got a thanks, nor was it necessary. Nor has it ever been necessary when we eased the suffering of troops, even MSGTs who may have needed some medical help. We never asked for a thank you. We just go on about our business.

That has been my life and my duty for nearly 30 years now. And I hold it as sacred now as I did then. What I take exception to is that you whine that I made an observation when I would just rather you say, I disagree, and go on about your business. And yes, I have had to wash the blood of Marine Gunnery Sergeants and Master Gunnys from my cammies and my trop whites (the "Good Humor" uniform.) It is the same evolution I have had to perform dozens, if not hundreds of times. So now you know. Just take a chill pill and keep your comments to yourself if they are hateful. I don't have the time or desire to listen to more.

You called out the entire RF on their professionalism. To me that is hateful

The *** fotr tat was not to say I was any better than you, but to say yes you had a job to do and you did it, I had a job to do and I did it. I was not trying for one upmanship. It was to show for every item you can bring up I can as well.

As for rank I never brought it up but I can comment on it if you really wish.

The main intent is that we are no less professional than you were. It is strange that you cannot see the insult, even if not intended, after it was pointed out to you.

It is much like the discussions of who is better between Marine or Navy, combat vs non combat specialties, FMF vs land, airborne or leg. to say you were more professional because of a few more years AD is an incorrect assumption.

Sir, the assumption was yours, not mine. Where exactly did you see an insult? I have read my post several times. So has at least one other. Neither he nor I see any insult. Of course, if you were looking for one, you would invariably find it. THAT, is intended to get your intention. I never called out anybody on their "professionalism". Rather I made a comment about what is rightly called a "professional soldier" versus and "weekend warrior". If you have never heard that term, then you have closed your ears to those around you. As for the one upmanship, that, again is your ballgame, not mine. You have made many erroneous assumptions about me and my experience, presumably as an attempt to communicate with me that you had read my profile. That is what it is there for, for all to read and see my experience. Still, you closed your eyes to what was there (regarding my deployments).

It is obvious to me that you are looking for fault in those around you and you will not accept the views of others around you. It seems to me that you are fine with being hateful and when someone else makes a statement with which you do not agree, you call them foolish or hateful. THAT is hateful and if you can't see it, then you truly are not capable of reason.

You are the only one who has attempted to set in motion a "one upmanship" with regard to the Navy and Marine Corps and you either can't read, or you have no concept of reason. My job was as a Hospital Corpsman. I did it with both the blue Navy and the green Navy. I have no preferences, we get along great.

As far as my "professionalism" as a Sailor, you bet your butt I have the edge on someone with only one four year term as a member of the regular component. I have more experience as a professional Sailor. That is the essence of all employment and endeavors - those with the most and longest experience get to be the ones to whom reference is made for making decisions within that particular area. In the military, after a break in service, the person, regardless of prior experience, loses seniority. If you don't see that, then you are not up with the program. That is a fact of life.

So step off, hoss, you don't get it. The gist of my post in the beginning, that only you have taken offense at, was that perceptions about the deployment and status are subject to the status of the individual Soldier, Sailor, Marine or Airman and whether they are, by definition, PROFESSIONAL Soldiers, etc, or the 'WEEKEND WARRIORS' who are not as experienced in the day to day operations of the military agency. I have given you quotes and links to what the services say regarding augmentation and the your own mission as a reservist or guardsman. If you simply don't like the label, too bad, you got into the wrong line of work if you want sensitivity. It is a label used by many more than me.

Doc Commander, clear.

I see that you canot read and understand what is written or what you write.

You do not understand that weekend warrior is a slang term often used as an insult. If an outsider started calling you squidie, swabbie how would you view that?

You miss this part or did you just gloss over

quote:

But the professionalism plays a key role in the issue.

Those are your words, but now you say you did not say that. Look above it is still there

since you enjoy posting definitions

pro·fes·sion·al·ism [pruh-fesh-uh-nl-iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. professional character, spirit, or methods.
2. the standing, practice, or methods of a professional, as distinguished from an amateur.

Do you yet see why I took offense.

You started with the have you done this have you done that I did this and that. When I did a one for one exchange you added more, then another whole post just to list your accomplishments. That is not one upmanship? Even after I pointed out I was going point for point to illustrate we each had a job to do, you wish to turn it into "one upmanship" with regard to the Navy and Marine Corps. I never brought in either service, I only dicussed you.

As for the augmentee issue I never said RF did not augment the AD or have a problem with the word, it was in response to your incorret statement

quote:

this plays significantly on the morale of the troops as the professionals are with shipmates and teammates they already know quite intimately, whereas the augmentees often are sent to fill a vacant role and may not know the personnel with whom they may bivouac.

this is rarely done, and when it is it is usually with another unit within the command. I then pointed out that RF work together for many years more than AD. How long did you usually work with a team or crew? You took one word out of your sentence and gave it a definition that did not fit the context of what you said, when my response had been to the sentence not the word.

You talk about me not being willing to debate or discuss when it was you who brushed every point aside and are not willing to even consider any viewpoint but your own. Why should you worry about someone you see as inferior and unprofessional.

The only reason I called you foolish is you asked what I though

quote:

What do you think?

Well I told you what I thought and you got butthurt at the answer. If you did not want an answer, why did you ask? Ask for an opinion you will too often get one. You do not agree with the opinion oh well, you still got it and it has not changed yet.

As for hateful, again it was a response. Re read and see where that word first pops up.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tomcatt,

quote:

Originally posted by Tomcatt:
I see that you canot read and understand what is written or what you write.

You do not understand that weekend warrior is a lang term most often used as an insult. If an outsider started calling you squidie, swabbie how would you view that?

You miss this part or did you just gloss over Look above it is still there

since you enjoy posting definitions

pro·fes·sion·al·ism [pruh-fesh-uh-nl-iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. professional character, spirit, or methods.
2. the standing, practice, or methods of a professional, as distinguished from an amateur.

Do you yet see why I took offense.

You started with the have you done this have you done that I did this and that. When I did a one for one exchange you added more, then another whole post just to list your accomplishments. That is not one upmanship? Even after I pointed out I was going point for point to illustrate we each had a job to do, you wish to turn it into "one upmanship" with regard to the Navy and Marine Corps. I never brought in either service, I only dicussed you.

As for the augmentee issue I never said RF did not augment the AD or have a problem with the word, it was in response to your incorret statement

quote:

this plays significantly on the morale of the troops as the professionals are with shipmates and teammates they already know quite intimately, whereas the augmentees often are sent to fill a vacant role and may not know the personnel with whom they may bivouac.

this is rarely done, and when it is it is usually with another unit within the command. I then pointed out that RF work together for many years more than AD. How long did you usually work with a team or crew? You took one word out of your sentence and gave it a definition that did not fit the context of what you said, when my response had been to the sentence not the word.

You talk about me not being willing to debate or discuss when it was you who brushed every point aside and are not willing to even consider any viewpoint but your own. Why should you worry about someone you see as inferior and unprofessional.

The only reason I called you foolish is you asked what I though

quote:

What do you think?

Well I told you what I thought and you got butthurt at the answer. If you did not want an answer, why did you ask? Ask for an opinion you will too often get one. You do not agree with the opinion oh well, you still got it and it has not changed yet.

As for hateful, again it was a response. Re read and see where that word first pops up.

You are the most ignorant jackass I believe I have ever talked to. To begin with, we squids do not take offense in that term or swabbie, even when used by grunts or jarheads. That you would use it as an insult is no surprise here. You look at all things as insulting. Your life must really be miserable to be the "grinch" on the block.

quote:
But the professionalism plays a key role in the issue.
Those are your words, but now you say you did not say that. Look above it is still there

Yes, I said that. But in a context that you are either incapable of understanding or you refuse to see it because for some reason you feel that you don't like me even though you don't know me.
The context, you petty little man, is that the military professionalism is what plays a role, as in the experience and expertise.

Now for the Oxford definition of professionalism:

"The ability or skill of a professional". That comes from the Oxford Dictionary of Current English, Third Edition.

Next, professional is defined thusly:

"adj. 1. relating to or belonging to a profession [(I don't think that if you are a pharmacist, or maitre d', or electronics technician away from the reserve unit you belong to the profession of the Uniformed Services. Your profession is your civilian job since you probably engage in that profession forty hours a week or more)] 2. engaged in an activity as a paid job rather than as an amateur. 3. Competent. n. 1. a professional person. 2. a person who is very skilled in a particular activity."

If you took offense, buy a new dictionary that will be kinder to you. That ain't my fault.

Your "So you went on one deployment. What makes you say you were accustomed to such deployements if you only did it once? Many I worked with were there in 91 and some have had multiple deployments in the latest one. It seems they are more ready for it than your one time. I have been in a full time garrison military and it is not that much different than what we have as a civilian. I have seen fewer soldier who would not report in the RF than those AD who went AWOL so as not to deploy." posted at 0419 was the beginning to your meltdown, right after my initial posting.

"Most are not augmentees (which the AD has as well) but units that have trained together for years and deploy as a unit. Morale was high while we were deployed." What the hell do you call that that statement? And my statement was not incorrect, you just don't know what you're talking about. On deployments, and at our home command, we lived together in the barracks, we went out together, we knew more about each other than we knew ourselves. On the outside,.. why the hell am I even arguing with an ignorant jackass?

Well, enough. You are the cause for the problem between the professionals and weekend warriors.
When I use the terms, it is not as an insult. If you can't see it then you have major problems. I wish you luck in your endeavors. Take care of yourself.

Doc Commander ... signing off.

Not much different from the definition I posted

quote:

Now for the Oxford definition of professionalism:

"The ability or skill of a professional". That comes from the Oxford Dictionary of Current English, Third Edition. ah so you say the RF does not have ability or skill.

Next, professional is defined thusly:

"adj. 1. relating to or belonging to a profession • noun 1 a paid occupation, especially one involving training and a formal qualification. I was paid I was trained and I had a formal qualification [(I don't think that if you are a pharmacist, or maitre d', or electronics technician away from the reserve unit you belong to the profession of the Uniformed Services. Your profession is your civilian job since you probably engage in that profession forty hours a week or more I missed that time requirement in any of the definitions, please point out where it says that, or is it just you who says that? )] 2. engaged in an activity as a paid job rather than as an amateur. again I was paid 3. Competent. I am more than competent in my job n. 1. a professional person. 2. a person who is very skilled in a particular activity." I am very skilled in comunication and electronics

Thank you for the providing definition that shows that yes I am a professional. again if I missed the time requirements in the definitions pleas point them out, as that seems to be your only basis for saying the RF is unprofessional unprofessional

• adjective below or contrary to the standards expected in a particular profession.

Oh and yes these all came form the Oxford dictionary so you could not claim I used some inferior brand

quote:

"Most are not augmentees (which the AD has as well) but units that have trained together for years and deploy as a unit. Morale was high while we were deployed." What the hell do you call that that statement? And my statement was not incorrect, you just don't know what you're talking about. On deployments, and at our home command, we lived together in the barracks, we went out together, we knew more about each other than we knew ourselves. On the outside,.. why the hell am I even arguing with an ignorant jackass? wow I was thinking the same thing

I see you are still tapdancing around the question How long were you together? 18 months? 2 years? 3? I am pretty sure it was not 10 or 12. we do not only see each other on the weekend drills, we live in the same community. We go to each others weddings, celebrate a new child, go to a parents funeral. I still spend time with old unit members, we are a family.

To get back to my original point and for anyone who cares to look at the point made, the perception made, as Tawodi said in his post earlier, "there is a larger percentage of them ["weekend warriors", e.g. reservists and guardsmen] than regulars that are disillusioned (sic)" with the idea of extending their tours whereas the regulars treat it as just another day at work. That is based on the fact that most of the reservists and guardsmen did not expect to be called to augment the regular components, so they leave home and head off to what is generally unfamiliar territory. That is especially so for the Guardsmen, since they are normally state agencies, not federal. So it is entirely understandable. That is the motivation to which I refer.

On ships, we went where we were sent and it was no problem. The Surgical Team, when we deployed, understood that the very nature of our team was to leave on a moments notice.

I also point out that all movements back then were classified. Now, it is a circus. Troop and ship movements are accompanied by full press coverage. That is just wrong.

I have not been able to find any inforama on the guys who wrote that article, but I suspect they are not the "professional" soldiers to which I referred before. The professionals take their code of conduct seriously, part of which is not to question the motivations of their superiors publicly nor officially. That is the point of my earlier diatribe. Apologies to the others who were brought into this squabble, it was not my intention.

Tawodi brought in his experience from the sixties. While I will say it is valid for the time, I am basing mine off experience that is 6 months old.

I am not sure where you have talked to most reservist to find they did not expect to be called up, that went out the window in '91. You stated you were never in the Reserves so how many do you know? again you talk from a knowledge you have already said you do not have. After 2001 we knew it was going to happen. It was not a case of if but when.

As for not being able to find any information on the guys who wrote the article, you have just show that you cannot read or maybe just cannot comprehend what is written. It is right there in the first paragraph. These are Active Duty soldiers from the 82d Abn Div, by your definition (not mine) they are professionals.

By the way, when you hit rock bottom you really should stop digging

quote:

Originally posted by Tomcatt:
Tawodi brought in his experience from the sixties. While I will say it is valid for the time, I am basing mine off experience that is 6 months old.

I am not sure where you have talked to most reservist to find they did not expect to be called up, that went out the window in '91. You stated you were never in the Reserves so how many do you know? again you talk from a knowledge you have already said you do not have. After 2001 we knew it was going to happen. It was not a case of if but when.

As for not being able to find any information on the guys who wrote the article, you have just show that you cannot read or maybe just cannot comprehend what is written. It is right there in the first paragraph. These are Active Duty soldiers from the 82d Abn Div, by your definition (not mine) they are professionals.

Because, you hapless simpleton, I had reservists working for me in 90 and 91 who got called up TO FILL THE VACANCIES AT THE NAVAL HOSPITALS because the regulars had deployed to Desert Shield and Desert Storm. I had so many of them come to me complaining about this or that. Two of the women reservists who were called up got pregnant so that their orders would be nullified.

You see, your experience means nothing to me because you apparently live in a vacuum where all you see are reservists or militiamen. My experience was strictly military (that is apart from my civilian business dealings when we were able to staff the hospitals in Corpus Christi). The augmentees were assigned to us. I had about seven, since I was the LPO of military medicine an pediatrics. At our departmental meetings, we went over the binnacle list, the discipline list, etc. Most of the discipline problems I had to deal with were the reservists. Not all of them were like that, but none of them expected to be actually called up.

The problem here is we have a Ninth Circuit person trying to apply his skewed reasoning to something that he knows nothing really about.

quote:

Originally posted by Tomcatt:
By the way, when you hit rock bottom you really should stop digging

Take your own advice.

quote:

Originally posted by PeteCDR:

quote:

Originally posted by Tomcatt:
Tawodi brought in his experience from the sixties. While I will say it is valid for the time, I am basing mine off experience that is 6 months old.

I am not sure where you have talked to most reservist to find they did not expect to be called up, that went out the window in '91. You stated you were never in the Reserves so how many do you know? again you talk from a knowledge you have already said you do not have. After 2001 we knew it was going to happen. It was not a case of if but when.

As for not being able to find any information on the guys who wrote the article, you have just show that you cannot read or maybe just cannot comprehend what is written. It is right there in the first paragraph. These are Active Duty soldiers from the 82d Abn Div, by your definition (not mine) they are professionals.

Because, you hapless simpleton, I had reservists working for me in 90 and 91 who got called up TO FILL THE VACANCIES AT THE NAVAL HOSPITALS because the regulars had deployed to Desert Shield and Desert Storm. I had so many of them come to me complaining about this or that. Two of the women reservists who were called up got pregnant so that their orders would be nullified. I am sure they told this was why the got pregnant too, or is it an assumption

You see, your experience means nothing to me becuse it contradicts your preconceved notions because you apparently live in a vacuum where all you see are reservists or militiamen. My experience was strictly military (that is apart from my civilian business dealings when we were able to staff the hospitals in Corpus Christi wow 24/7/365 training and you could still work on the civilian side. time machine? ). The augmentees were assigned to us. I had about seven, that many? it must have been horrible for you since I was the LPO of military medicine an pediatrics. At our departmental meetings, we went over the binnacle list, the discipline list, etc. Most of the discipline problems I had to deal with were the reservists. Not all of them were like that, but none of them expected to be actually called up.

The problem here is we have a Ninth Circuit person trying to apply his skewed reasoning to something that he knows nothing really about. saying this about someone who was both active and reserve compared to only active, oh yes you have a better grasp on reservists

ah so you base your opinion on 7 reservist from 91. I guess you missed where the RF went thru a big change after '91 and it was no longer a It'll never happen thing.

Only reservist females get pregnant? Why is it that AD units often go from the normal 10% pregnancy rate to up to 50% when they get a deployment alert? And that is the first I have heard about pregnacy nullifying stateside duty orders. It may have been like that then but not now. The one (yes only one) soldier who got pregnant in our unit did not get out of mobilization, but did stay on stateside duty.

Why are you still ignoring the question how long did you serve with a team or crew?

quote:

To begin with, we squids do not take offense in that term or swabbie, even when used by grunts or jarheads. That you would use it as an insult is no surprise here.

I never said it was an insult or even used it as one. I asked how you would feel. I am sorry that you assume it was an insult, a bit defensive? The sailors I know run about 50-50 on that one and it is very dependant on who says it.

I think you are mentally unstable. You came at me with this "the only reason I called you foolish is that you asked what I thought (sic). Well I told you what I thought and you got butthurt at the answer." You very first statement was this:

"I think you have no clue what you are talking about and it embarrasses me that you would call those who are in the RF non-professional."

Which are you, a liar or mentally unstable? The transcript shows it, now you deny it. I didn't get "butthurt" by your statements, you were the one who said I embarassed you. Why is that? Did I strike a sore spot with you?

A person who is reasonable and intelligent, such as tawodi, (with respect) was not relying on forty year old experience. Your quote:

"Tawodi brought in his experience from the sixties."

He was not relying on his sixties experience to say that he understands me. Your apparent one dimensional thought has not served you well. You are only seeing one thing - your view. You can't accept that other people have a differing view because you are not capable of that form of reason.

As for trying to throw an insult at me saying that I proved you are a professional, "methinks he doth protest too much". A person is either a professional in one field or a professional in another field. You may be "skilled in communication and electronics" but id that what you do for the Militia as your primary source of income? In other words do the hours you work at that for the Guard total more (for pay) than the hours you work doing it in the civilian sector? That is as simple as I can get it.

It is much more likely that your definitions came from Webster's or some online source, but not Oxford Dictionary. I have the Oxford to which I refer because it is the most reliable, just not the most used. That makes you a liar and your credibility zero. My Oxford has the ISBN ending in 378-9. If you can give me the first numbers, then I will retract my statement and say that you are not a liar and I was wrong about that.

So you are easily hurt, you aren't reasonable and you are a liar. But I will be glad to say that you are not a liar, and you are easily hurt and not reasonble. If you are a liar, what else are you lying about? Oh, and you say your name is Catt, but your nametag in the picture does not say that. It says Carter. I think you are a liar all the way around. "n. a person who tells lies." That is also from Oxford.

I think I have said enough here.

Please stop the name calling and calling out other members. Thank You.

Mainedawg
Moderator

Roger that, Maindawg. Sorry about that.

-Doc Commander

quote:

Originally posted by PeteCDR:
I think you are mentally unstable. You came at me with this "the only reason I called you foolish is that you asked what I thought (sic). Well I told you what I thought and you got butthurt at the answer." You very first statement was this:

"I think you have no clue what you are talking about and it embarrasses me that you would call those who are in the RF non-professional." What is your point? yes I said that

Which are you, a liar or mentally unstable? The transcript shows it, now you deny it. No I do not, look down at the end of the first post where I again said what I thought, that is where I said fool. Yes it is there, I did say I thought you were a fool, how is me saying I said that, when I did a lie? I am confused. I didn't get "butthurt" by your statements, you were the one who said I embarassed you. Why is that? Did I strike a sore spot with you?

A person who is reasonable and intelligent, such as tawodi, (with respect) was not relying on forty year old experience. Your quote:

"Tawodi brought in his experience from the sixties."

He was not relying on his sixties experience to say that he understands me. really? so when he specificly brings up his experience in the sixties he is not using that esperience from the sixties? I have no idea how i got that Idea that his sixties experience came from the sixties. Your apparent one dimensional thought has not served you well. You are only seeing one thing - your view. You can't accept that other people have a differing view because you are not capable of that form of reason.

As for trying to throw an insult at me saying that I proved you are a professional, "methinks he doth protest too much". A person is either a professional in one field or a professional in another field. You may be "skilled in communication and electronics" but id that what you do for the Militia as your primary source of income? In other words do the hours you work at that for the Guard total more (for pay) than the hours you work doing it in the civilian sector? I never said it was. I said the time was never part of the definitions you provided, but I did meet all the standards of the definition you provided. Your trying to add standards that are not there does not mean anything. You provide the definition, I just fit it. That is as simple as I can get it.

It is much more likely that your definitions came from Webster's or some online source, but not Oxford Dictionary. I have the Oxford to which I refer because it is the most reliable, just not the most used. That makes you a liar and your credibility zero. Did your Oxford say anything different than what I did? If it did you would have posted it. Yes mine is online, I never said it was not. It was from the Oxford website. My Oxford has the ISBN ending in 378-9. If you can give me the first numbers, then I will retract my statement and say that you are not a liar and I was wrong about that. again if your said something different please post it. I guess it is possible that what they put in print and what they put online may be different but I doubt it.

So you are easily hurt, you aren't reasonable and you are a liar. But I will be glad to say that you are not a liar, and you are easily hurt and not reasonble. If you are a liar, what else are you lying about? Oh, and you say your name is Catt, but your nametag in the picture does not say that. It says Carter. I think you are a liar all the way around. "n. a person who tells lies." That is also from Oxford. You are correct, when I deployed I changed it for PERSEC reasons. So? It was suggested I do so by a mod on this site.

I think I have said enough here.

It seems you are going to finally stop digging. And I notice you still refuse to answer how long you normally worked with a team or crew. Was it 10 or more years?

Maybe I am taking this a bit hard. How about you other sodiers who were RF. Is being called just a weekend warrior and unprofessional insulting or is a correct assesment of Reserve and Guard soldiers?

To make a clarification so that others can make a proper, unbiased distinction, the term "NON PROFESSIONAL" was used, not "UNPROFESSIONAL".