Vet 0369
-
Posts
1,388 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Vet 0369
-
-
12 hours ago, Bearstronaut said:
Brother, no offense but it’s been over 40 years since you were in the military. I spent most of the last decade on active duty with the army and am currently a reservist. Trust me, it’s an 8 year service obligation.
https://www.arpc.afrc.af.mil/IRR/Well, live and learn, i stand corrected! Thank you for the reply. I imagine the change was due to the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Interesting that it’s codified in 10 U.S. Code. I wonder if they also changed the Selective Service Act?
-
4 minutes ago, MSBoxer said:
Colonel (Chaplain), retired in 1989 after 22 years. His final posting was in the department which was responsible for keeping in touch with retired chaplains who were still on the potential recall list. That is why it was so funny that he was recalled. Mom called the general and told him "If Chuck shows up, let me know. I have some questions for him"
He passed Jan. 1 1991, about 1 1/2 months before the liberation of Kuwait, which is why he was recalled. As my cousin said "God needed him to welcome any incoming troops"Thank you for clarifying that. As I said, an Officer is appointed by Congress, and can and may be recalled up to a certain age. It sounds to me like an administrative SNAFU.
God bless him an all of you. He served in one of the most crucial jobs in the Military.
-
22 minutes ago, MSBoxer said:
My father was recalled 2 years after retiring. It was also 2 months after he died. Oddly enough the signature on his recall orders was signed by the same general who sent his honor guard to my dad's funeral since he was dad's last commanding officer and a good friend.
Not sure how this ties into anything....still find it funny.MSBoxer, I very sorry to hear about the loss of your Father. Was he an Officer or Enlisted? If Enlisted, perhaps he had re-enlisted for four years shortly before retiring which would have him still under contract? That’s the only circumstance I can think where one could be recalled. If you still have his orders that activated him, those could shed some light on it.
-
On 7/8/2022 at 2:40 PM, Bearstronaut said:
When you enlist in the US military you sign up for 8 years. If you enlist for an active duty contract of 5 years then you still owe three years to Uncle Sam in either the regular Reserves or the Inactive Ready Reserve. The regular Reserves you do the whole “one weekend a month, two weeks a year” thing. IRR you don’t have to do a thing but the military can call you back if the crap hits the fan. After you complete the 8 year obligation I’m not sure they can legally force you back in the military. However, retirees can be called back to active duty.
To be perfectly honest, during my 12 years in the U.S.M.C (1969 to 1981), I have never heard of an “eight-year” contract. The Selective Service Act sets your obligation to six years. If some “creative” Recruiter got someone to sign a contract for eight years with those other conditions, then SHAME ON HIM OR HER and the Commanding Officer for deceiving a gullible 18 or 19-year old with such crap. I’d put them in the same category as the recruiters who deceived the young Russian Conscripts to sign contracts so the could be sent to Ukraine without their knowledge. I I served as a Recruiter for a bit, so I know some of their deceptively vague tricks, but have never heard of anyone doing eight-year contracts. Even the contracts to reenlist are from two to four years maximum.
Unless you are under contract, to the best of my knowledge, you CANNOT be forced back into the service unless you were an Officer.
-
On 7/8/2022 at 1:31 PM, Artkin said:
What is Russia's policy on recalling troops who finished their contracts already? A large portion of the "reserves" could be this pool of people.
Here in the US you can be recalled after you serve. So if you served 5 years then they can recall you back into service even if you were already out for 4 years. I believe the amount of time is the same as you served. This is what I was told by a friend.
Every male citizen in the U.S. has a six-year “obligation” to serve That is part of the Selective Service Act. Every eligible male is required to register with the Selective Service. Since we now have an “All Volunteer Service,” each individual has the choice of whether or not to “fulfill” his obligation. I f you serve two years in the military, you generally serve two years active duty and four years Active Reserve. Three years Active Duty is (I believe,) two years Active Reserves, and one year inactive Ready Reserves possibly three years Inactive Ready Reserves, and if four years Active Duty, two years Iactive Ready Reserves.At the end of those times, the man has fulfilled his six-year obligation to serve, and cannot be called up under any circumstance. An Officer, on the other hand holds his or her Commission from Congress, and can (ability) and may (permission) be recalled until a specific age, that I don’t know.
-
On 7/7/2022 at 3:51 PM, Grey_Fox said:
I think that's unfair. Many of us are just people who want to give you money for content. 1000+ page abominations like this thread don't do anything for me.
It would be nice if this forum could go back to being about Combat Mission instead of just sperging about an ongoing war. Some of us are dealing with the human consequences of it right now - there are currently 46 Ukrainian refugees living a couple of hundred meters away from my family home - doctors, lawyers, dentists, logistics managers, business people etc who have become refugees whom we interact with on a daily basis.
I think you are being unfair to this THREAD. This a thread about the war in Ukraine, not perceived upgrades to the CM line. Believe it or not, there are actually threads in other sections of the Battlefront forum where you are more than welcome to post this type of thread instead of attempting to hijack this thread.
-
1 minute ago, sburke said:
at this point I'd settle for Zamboni crew. Sharks about the same.
Honestly, I don’t other with sports any more. It got way to boring with all the championship parades. Just kidding, I never paid much mind to the State’s gladiatorial games.
-
On 7/6/2022 at 12:44 PM, sburke said:
Elvis and I are pissed- that is a Flyers goalie, and we need all the help we can get.
Are the Flyers the Bruins farm team or training team?
-
5 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:
I’m really behind the eight ball in catching up on replies in the thread, and apologize if I’m duplicating.
I’m sorry, but I must really disagree with this statement. One of the first actions of a repressive or dictatorial government to ensure “The People” cannot remove it is to ban private ownership of weapons that could be used to combat it. In my country, the U.S.A., we have enshrined in our Constitution that “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The purpose of that right was to ensure that no Tyrantical Federal Government would be able to disarm the People (Citizens). The statement that precedes those words “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a freeState,” was added at the end of the deliberations because one Representative was afraid a Federal Government could disband the States Militias, and refused to agree until it was added. So, whatever your views and beliefs regarding private ownership of weapons, it has been the law of the land in the U.S.A. For almost 300 years, and in fact, was required by all the Colonies since the early 17th Century. Are there detractors of that right? Yes, but whether a mass murder is committed using a firearm or by driving a semi tractor trailer through a crowd on a boulevard in Southern France, the murders were not committed by the firearm or the semi tractor.
I would go a step further and enshrine the right of the citizens to keep weapons and the responsibility of every citizen to train and serve, if necessary, in a National “Militia.”
I’m sorry, I inadvertently deleted the quote of the post by Poesel on page 995.
-
I’m really behind the eight ball in catching up on replies in the thread, and apologize if I’m duplicating.
I’m sorry, but I must really disagree with this statement. One of the first actions of a repressive or dictatorial government to ensure “The People” cannot remove it is to ban private ownership of weapons that could be used to combat it. In my country, the U.S.A., we have enshrined in our Constitution that “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The purpose of that right was to ensure that no Tyrantical Federal Government would be able to disarm the People (Citizens). The statement that precedes those words “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a freeState,” was added at the end of the deliberations because one Representative was afraid a Federal Government could disband the States Militias, and refused to agree until it was added. So, whatever your views and beliefs regarding private ownership of weapons, it has been the law of the land in the U.S.A. For almost 300 years, and in fact, was required by all the Colonies since the early 17th Century. Are there detractors of that right? Yes, but whether a mass murder is committed using a firearm or by driving a semi tractor trailer through a crowd on a boulevard in Southern France, the murders were not committed by the firearm or the semi tractor.
I would go a step further and enshrine the right of the citizens to keep weapons and the responsibility of every citizen to train and serve, if necessary, in a National “Militia.”
-
5 minutes ago, sburke said:
Russians Fear Commanders Are Selling Their Own Troops’ Locations for Cash (thedailybeast.com)
That's gotta be good for morale.
LOL, PsyOps at work! Start a rumor and watch it roll.
-
1 hour ago, Jammason said:
Further, “righteous points” are scored by Russia with the change in objectives (to be sure, it requires amnesia regarding the initial invasion or a belief in the military “feint” line, which is being swallowed by the US far right): They are simply acting like the French did in support of the American Revolution (yes, the French committed troops and deployed their navy in addition to sending money and weapons). These poor Russian-speaking—and increasingly Russian identifying—republics are being denied their freedom; we, noble mother Russia, are just helping them fight for independence.
Welcome to the forum!
While you make a good argument, the major flaw I see in you’re argument is that, while there might have been some French incitement of the U.S. Revolution, it was the English colonists who rebelled (and in fact only one ninth of the population actively participated in revolt, a minority by any calculation). France didn’t contribute money or military forces until the war was almost settled and the Colonies proved they could win. In fact, the former French Colony of New France (in particular Arcadia) that Britain had taken only 15 years before the Revolution, considered joining the Thirteen Colonies in revolt, and decided not to even though they had reason to (the British were vicious in their repression of the French speaking inhabitants in Acadia). Arcadia would have been a perfect breeding ground for French incitement, but it doesn’t appear to have happened. So, your attempted corollary to the French helping in the U.S. Revolution fails.
-
14 hours ago, Grigb said:
Regarding Belarus Nukes discussion, here is quote from recent Putin-Luka meeting:
Ah yes, send us all your SU-25s, and we’ll upgrade them to each able to carry nukes. I vaguely remember the Soviet Union telling Afghanistan to send them all their vehicle batteries and they world upgrade them for free. Afghanistan gleefully sent the USSR all their vehicle batteries (including from their armor), at which point the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan.
-
On 6/23/2022 at 6:35 PM, Huba said:
Fully agreed, EU has to redefine itself in next years if it is to accept new members. Parting with unanimity is needed - Poland should be OK with this I hope, if our history teaches us something, it is that liberum veto can easily destroy a democracy.
Would that be a reference to “Exploding the Diet?”
-
15 hours ago, BornGinger said:
What is his relationship to your neigbours?
I’m sorry, I don’t understand your question.
-
On 6/16/2022 at 3:48 PM, sburke said:
training center dude... guess the new recruits just get handed a weapon and pointed west. Well maybe handed a weapon.
A friend of mine, and best friend of one of my wife’s cousins, was born in and immigrated from Poland prior to the Soviet collapse, told me that he grew up about 19Km from the Ukraine border. His Grandfather was conscripted out of his house as the Soviets passed through during WWII. He said they gave him a bullet ridden overcoat and put him at the head of their column to make sure he couldn’t run away. He asked about a rifle, and was told he would just pick one up off the ground at the front. That night, his Grandfather and a few others ran off into the woods and escaped. Unfortunately, atrocities by Ukrainians and Poles along that border caused much vengeance by both sides, and there is still little love lost there. My friend will proudly say that he’s half Ukrainian, but more proudly say that he’s Polish. Such is the history of the region.
-
8 hours ago, Ultradave said:
I'm not sure if I'm using the correct term. Perhaps not.
Mac users always get a message that the software can't be checked for viruses when attempting to install, and the default response is to move it to the trash (this is if you double click on the installer). The only other response is Cancel, which aborts.
If we use the right-click, Open method, then the same or similar message appears but it asks if we want to open anyway.
These happen when unpacking the installer, and again when running the installer.
A lot of Mac users new to Battlefront question this and have to be told how to go about the installation because many aren't even familiar with semi-bypassing that check by right-click Open.
Hope that helps figure it out. It would save some questions if it worked like most other software.
DaveI’ve been playing Combat Mission on my Mac since the CM1 and Shock Force Paradox (CDs) days with no issues. I have all the titles except CM Afghanistan, and have never had an issue with the certificate issue. I do know that some of my friends who downloaded the demos had the issue though. I’ve never used any of the Steam or Matrix versions though, so they might be “suspect.”
-
3 minutes ago, danfrodo said:
yeah, exactly a fear I have had last couple days. Easily fordable rivers.
Meanwhile I am on the edge of my seat about Huba's post on alleged UKR Izyum attack. I am check here every 5 minutes hoping for something solid.
“Easily forded rivers and streams” are pretty deadly areas. If I know where the fording points are, I’m going to have arty preregistered at those points and have them under constant surveillance.
-
33 minutes ago, holoween said:
Thats not how this works at least in english. The US or the UK seem to disagree with this idea for example.
I place the the major difference here as being that the US or the UK haven’t tended to use the article to indicate an inferior subject region or territory as The Russia does.
-
21 hours ago, FancyCat said:
Assuming this isn't another instance of Ukraine just no to their visit soon, would mean more weapons and equipment for Ukraine is about to be pledged.
Until I have definitive proof to the contrary, I usually suspect these types of “visits* are nothing more than what we call “live-shots” here in the U.S. They are always for political gain over the opposing party. One particularly discussing one for me was an unannounced photo op of a Congressional Representative during the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan that caused the Marine Security to have to divert Marines from their mission to provide security for the withdrawal (no U.S. military commander will risk even a publicity hound politician being killed or injured “on their watch”. I’m particularly disgusted because he represents my District, he is a Former Marine Officer who served in Afghanistan on the Judge Advocate Staff (a Lawyer, not a combat officer) and should have known better. Even his own Party was furious with his actions.
-
On 6/11/2022 at 12:27 PM, Battlefront.com said:
There's been similar statements from Ukrainian sources for a couple of days now. This isn't too worrying because Ukraine has most of what it needs to replace its 152mm guns with NATO standard 155mm guns. I can't remember how many shells for those are already in Ukraine, but it's measured in weeks worth of supply, not days, and is still growing.
What this indicates to me is that Ukraine made the right requests at the right time in the right way so that it has been able to transition over to NATO standards with minimal disruption to artillery support. However, it seems like the availability of NATO 155mm came just in time, which of course isn't optimal.
Steve
The thing that I try to keep in mind when reading these “releases” from Ukraine is the possibility of PsyOps. What better way to encourage a “totally hide bound” enemy to become over-confident, to under-estimate the strength of Ukraine, and to bait the Russia into an I’ll-advised offensive that you can then smash decisively.
NOTE: My use of “The Russia” is not a typo. It is intentional. As Haiduk explained in a reply to a question from me long ago in this thread, regarding “The Ukraine” vs. “Ukraine,” using “The” indicates an inferior territory or region.
-
On 6/11/2022 at 11:09 AM, Seminole said:
To not be misunderstood, NATO serves the interventionist cause as an international fig leaf for aggressive U.S. military action.
‘It’s not America doing this, we’re answering the international call for justice.’
Politicians in part use this concept of multilateral international support to try and sidestep domestic support/authorization. Recall Bush I’s team considered they didn’t have to get Congressional support, and argued the president was already authorized to answer the UN’s call to military action. Now they wisely obtained that support prior to hostilities (unlike Clinton (vote failed for Congressional authorization) and Obama (never even sought Congressional authorization)).
Do you think any EU members were going going to initiate a bombing campaign against Serbia without the U.S.? It’s almost as laughable logistically as it is from a military efficacy standpoint.As for the UNSC:
NATO countries attempted to gain authorisation from the UN Security Council for military action, but were opposed by China and Russia, who indicated that they would veto such a measure. As a result, NATO launched its campaign without the UN's approval, stating that it was a humanitarian intervention. The UN Charter prohibits the use of force except in the case of a decision by the Security Council under Chapter VII, or self-defence against an armed attack – neither of which were present in this case.[34]
With respect to Libya, again the U.S. president failed to obtain Congressional approval, and I already linked the UK parliament’s report on the lies used by Western politicians to justify the bombing campaign and support for the Islamist revolutionaries:
An in depth investigation into the Libyan intervention and its aftermath was conducted by the U.K. Parliament's House of Commons' cross-party Foreign Affairs Committee, the final conclusions of which were released on 14 September 2016 in a report titled Libya: Examination of intervention and collapse and the UK's future policy options.[232] The report was strongly critical of the British government's role in the intervention.[233][234] The report concluded that the government "failed to identify that the threat to civilians was overstated and that the rebels included a significant Islamist element."[235] In particular, the committee concluded that Gaddafi was not planning to massacre civilians, and that reports to the contrary were propagated by rebels and Western governments. Western leaders trumpeted the threat of the massacre of civilians without factual basis, according to the parliamentary report, for example, it had been reported to Western leaders that on 17 March 2011 Gaddafi had given Benghazi rebels the offer of peaceful surrender and also that when Gaddafi had earlier retaken other rebel cities there were no massacres of non-combatants.
The idea that France would have militarily intervened without the U.S. is not tenable. This military intervention never happens without the White House agreeing to it, for what we have learned are dubious public reason.
Regardless, neither the Serbian or Libyan interventions where ‘defensive’ responses by NATO, bolstering the notion the ‘defensive alliance’ was indeed more than that, and used to aggressively intervene in foreign countries that had never attacked a NATO member.
That is reality.
You can say the Russians are paranoid, but you can’t say truthfully that NATO is just a defensive alliance. Clinton and Obama decided to use it for diplomatic cover when they lacked UN and Congressional authorization for their desire to solve problems with bombs.OK, while this this poster’s two posts are very interesting from the Russian point of view, they have nothing to do with Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. I fully expect him to eventually cross the line and be banned as a Russian Bot. Therefore, let’s not feed the Troll.
-
On 6/11/2022 at 6:58 AM, poesel said:
.Then why did Poland insist on Leo2 A7s instead of available A4s?
Whether you are negotiating an arms deal or requesting fire support, you request nukes and accept 60mm mortars. It is always common practice to goe for the best while being willing to except the lesser.
-
5 hours ago, Kinophile said:
Incredible.
Haiduk's in for a hell of a surprise when he gets back on his pc...
$1500 to get him a new laptop. Amazing. Thank you, everyone who donated.
You did a really great job with a fabulous idea. I think it would be even better if you delivered it to him in person! That way, it would also prevent it from being stolen along the way.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Thank you for posting the link. It’s about 23 miles south of me. Told my wife about it, but our State rate of COVID infections is rising, so probably not for us at our ages. We do have another UKR charity we support though.