#1
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote:
On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM, wrote: Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war mongers. Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc typically predated the president in office at the time (whether Republican or Democrat) the shooting started. Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan), invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush), inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan (GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger umbrella conflicts mentioned above. There were also conflicts that started under Democratic presidents, but Tom didn't declare that those didn't happen so I don't need to enumerate them. Eisenhower under treaty with France supplied military advisers to French Indochina as Vietnam was called then. Kennedy decided that America would be much better off with a war instead of looking on. Your "examples" demonstrated either US policing actions to protect US citizens such as in Lebanon. Or treaty obligations as Desert Storm. Do you really believe that countries selling us a great deal of ANY product don't sign treaties with us? Or is it your position that treaties should be ignored? |
Ads |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 6:52:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM, wrote: Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war mongers. Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc typically predated the president in office at the time (whether Republican or Democrat) the shooting started. Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan), invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush), inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan (GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger umbrella conflicts mentioned above. There were also conflicts that started under Democratic presidents, but Tom didn't declare that those didn't happen so I don't need to enumerate them. Eisenhower under treaty with France supplied military advisers to French Indochina as Vietnam was called then. Kennedy decided that America would be much better off with a war instead of looking on. You got it wrong again. In about 1950 the U.S. formed a so called Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) which managed the supply of some 10 million dollars in military equipment to support the French efforts in Vietnam. MAAG, by the way is simply a term used to denote a group which liaises with another government's military, that may or may not include advisers. As part of this "assistance" the U.S. loaned, lend leased, whatever you call it, some B-26 aircraft and supplied maintenance crews and parts for the airplanes, which were stationed at Saigon's airport. these aircraft were flown by French flight crews. In addition I believe there were a number of transport aircraft airplanes. As far as I know, from friends who were assigned to the B-26 group and went to Vietnam there were no so called military advisors. U.S.A.F. people maintained the airplanes and the French flew them. Since I got that directly from the New York Times you'll have to explain it to them. But maintenance crews can hardly be called combat troops would it? I never felt I was in the war until I was being shot at. What do you suppose that service cross was for? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:04:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 6:52:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM, wrote: Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war mongers. Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc typically predated the president in office at the time (whether Republican or Democrat) the shooting started. Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan), invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush), inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan (GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger umbrella conflicts mentioned above. There were also conflicts that started under Democratic presidents, but Tom didn't declare that those didn't happen so I don't need to enumerate them. Eisenhower under treaty with France supplied military advisers to French Indochina as Vietnam was called then. Kennedy decided that America would be much better off with a war instead of looking on. You got it wrong again. In about 1950 the U.S. formed a so called Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) which managed the supply of some 10 million dollars in military equipment to support the French efforts in Vietnam. MAAG, by the way is simply a term used to denote a group which liaises with another government's military, that may or may not include advisers. As part of this "assistance" the U.S. loaned, lend leased, whatever you call it, some B-26 aircraft and supplied maintenance crews and parts for the airplanes, which were stationed at Saigon's airport. these aircraft were flown by French flight crews. In addition I believe there were a number of transport aircraft airplanes. As far as I know, from friends who were assigned to the B-26 group and went to Vietnam there were no so called military advisors. U.S.A.F. people maintained the airplanes and the French flew them. Since I got that directly from the New York Times you'll have to explain it to them. If you post a site for the article I would be happy to critique it :-) I did a bit more reading and the only mention I can find of U.S. participation prior to 1954 was the use of U.S. aircraft and supply of military supplies. The U.S. Navy assisted to the extent of delivering aircraft to the French and in 1954 they assisted the French Navy in Operation Passage to Freedom, the transportation of N. Vietnamese who wished to leave the Communist North to go to the South. But maintenance crews can hardly be called combat troops would it? I never felt I was in the war until I was being shot at. What do you suppose that service cross was for? What "service cross"? the USAF Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded for: Who distinguishes himself or herself in support of operations by "heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in an aerial flight, subsequent to November 11, 1918" -- Cheers, John B. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 7:32:43 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:04:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 6:52:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM, wrote: Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war mongers. Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc typically predated the president in office at the time (whether Republican or Democrat) the shooting started. Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan), invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush), inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan (GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger umbrella conflicts mentioned above. There were also conflicts that started under Democratic presidents, but Tom didn't declare that those didn't happen so I don't need to enumerate them. Eisenhower under treaty with France supplied military advisers to French Indochina as Vietnam was called then. Kennedy decided that America would be much better off with a war instead of looking on. You got it wrong again. In about 1950 the U.S. formed a so called Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) which managed the supply of some 10 million dollars in military equipment to support the French efforts in Vietnam. MAAG, by the way is simply a term used to denote a group which liaises with another government's military, that may or may not include advisers. As part of this "assistance" the U.S. loaned, lend leased, whatever you call it, some B-26 aircraft and supplied maintenance crews and parts for the airplanes, which were stationed at Saigon's airport. these aircraft were flown by French flight crews. In addition I believe there were a number of transport aircraft airplanes. As far as I know, from friends who were assigned to the B-26 group and went to Vietnam there were no so called military advisors. U.S.A.F. people maintained the airplanes and the French flew them. Since I got that directly from the New York Times you'll have to explain it to them. If you post a site for the article I would be happy to critique it :-) I did a bit more reading and the only mention I can find of U.S. participation prior to 1954 was the use of U.S. aircraft and supply of military supplies. The U.S. Navy assisted to the extent of delivering aircraft to the French and in 1954 they assisted the French Navy in Operation Passage to Freedom, the transportation of N. Vietnamese who wished to leave the Communist North to go to the South. But maintenance crews can hardly be called combat troops would it? I never felt I was in the war until I was being shot at. What do you suppose that service cross was for? What "service cross"? the USAF Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded for: Who distinguishes himself or herself in support of operations by "heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in an aerial flight, subsequent to November 11, 1918" I don't remember a damn thing about it but I'm told that all those who served in a combat zone received a service cross. I was even shown a ribbon that would normally go on your uniform. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 06:26:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 7:32:43 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:04:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 6:52:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM, wrote: Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war mongers. Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc typically predated the president in office at the time (whether Republican or Democrat) the shooting started. Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan), invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush), inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan (GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger umbrella conflicts mentioned above. There were also conflicts that started under Democratic presidents, but Tom didn't declare that those didn't happen so I don't need to enumerate them. Eisenhower under treaty with France supplied military advisers to French Indochina as Vietnam was called then. Kennedy decided that America would be much better off with a war instead of looking on. You got it wrong again. In about 1950 the U.S. formed a so called Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) which managed the supply of some 10 million dollars in military equipment to support the French efforts in Vietnam. MAAG, by the way is simply a term used to denote a group which liaises with another government's military, that may or may not include advisers. As part of this "assistance" the U.S. loaned, lend leased, whatever you call it, some B-26 aircraft and supplied maintenance crews and parts for the airplanes, which were stationed at Saigon's airport. these aircraft were flown by French flight crews. In addition I believe there were a number of transport aircraft airplanes. As far as I know, from friends who were assigned to the B-26 group and went to Vietnam there were no so called military advisors. U.S.A.F. people maintained the airplanes and the French flew them. Since I got that directly from the New York Times you'll have to explain it to them. If you post a site for the article I would be happy to critique it :-) I did a bit more reading and the only mention I can find of U.S. participation prior to 1954 was the use of U.S. aircraft and supply of military supplies. The U.S. Navy assisted to the extent of delivering aircraft to the French and in 1954 they assisted the French Navy in Operation Passage to Freedom, the transportation of N. Vietnamese who wished to leave the Communist North to go to the South. But maintenance crews can hardly be called combat troops would it? I never felt I was in the war until I was being shot at. What do you suppose that service cross was for? What "service cross"? the USAF Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded for: Who distinguishes himself or herself in support of operations by "heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in an aerial flight, subsequent to November 11, 1918" I don't remember a damn thing about it but I'm told that all those who served in a combat zone received a service cross. I was even shown a ribbon that would normally go on your uniform. Nope. If you served in a combat area you received a "service medal" to indicate that you had served in the theater, but that wasn't considered a "decoration", i.e., something that you got for actually doing something. It was more of "I was there, and here's the tee shirt" sort of thing. -- Cheers, John B. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 6:59:42 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 06:26:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 7:32:43 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:04:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 6:52:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM, wrote: Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war mongers. Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc typically predated the president in office at the time (whether Republican or Democrat) the shooting started. Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan), invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush), inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan (GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger umbrella conflicts mentioned above. There were also conflicts that started under Democratic presidents, but Tom didn't declare that those didn't happen so I don't need to enumerate them. Eisenhower under treaty with France supplied military advisers to French Indochina as Vietnam was called then. Kennedy decided that America would be much better off with a war instead of looking on. You got it wrong again. In about 1950 the U.S. formed a so called Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) which managed the supply of some 10 million dollars in military equipment to support the French efforts in Vietnam. MAAG, by the way is simply a term used to denote a group which liaises with another government's military, that may or may not include advisers. As part of this "assistance" the U.S. loaned, lend leased, whatever you call it, some B-26 aircraft and supplied maintenance crews and parts for the airplanes, which were stationed at Saigon's airport. these aircraft were flown by French flight crews. In addition I believe there were a number of transport aircraft airplanes. As far as I know, from friends who were assigned to the B-26 group and went to Vietnam there were no so called military advisors. U.S.A.F. people maintained the airplanes and the French flew them. Since I got that directly from the New York Times you'll have to explain it to them. If you post a site for the article I would be happy to critique it :-) I did a bit more reading and the only mention I can find of U.S. participation prior to 1954 was the use of U.S. aircraft and supply of military supplies. The U.S. Navy assisted to the extent of delivering aircraft to the French and in 1954 they assisted the French Navy in Operation Passage to Freedom, the transportation of N. Vietnamese who wished to leave the Communist North to go to the South. But maintenance crews can hardly be called combat troops would it? I never felt I was in the war until I was being shot at. What do you suppose that service cross was for? What "service cross"? the USAF Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded for: Who distinguishes himself or herself in support of operations by "heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in an aerial flight, subsequent to November 11, 1918" I don't remember a damn thing about it but I'm told that all those who served in a combat zone received a service cross. I was even shown a ribbon that would normally go on your uniform. Nope. If you served in a combat area you received a "service medal" to indicate that you had served in the theater, but that wasn't considered a "decoration", i.e., something that you got for actually doing something. It was more of "I was there, and here's the tee shirt" sort of thing. You'll have to explain that to the Air Force since I wasn't qualified for it until I went on an actual combat mission. The maintenance people that sat on Guam didn't. It ****ed off the two sargeants that volunteered to go there in order to gain points for being promoted. Not that it made any difference to me since I wasn't going to be promoted anyway. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Fri, 1 Sep 2017 07:09:52 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 6:59:42 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 06:26:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 7:32:43 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:04:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 6:52:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM, wrote: Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war mongers. Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc typically predated the president in office at the time (whether Republican or Democrat) the shooting started. Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan), invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush), inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan (GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger umbrella conflicts mentioned above. There were also conflicts that started under Democratic presidents, but Tom didn't declare that those didn't happen so I don't need to enumerate them. Eisenhower under treaty with France supplied military advisers to French Indochina as Vietnam was called then. Kennedy decided that America would be much better off with a war instead of looking on. You got it wrong again. In about 1950 the U.S. formed a so called Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) which managed the supply of some 10 million dollars in military equipment to support the French efforts in Vietnam. MAAG, by the way is simply a term used to denote a group which liaises with another government's military, that may or may not include advisers. As part of this "assistance" the U.S. loaned, lend leased, whatever you call it, some B-26 aircraft and supplied maintenance crews and parts for the airplanes, which were stationed at Saigon's airport. these aircraft were flown by French flight crews. In addition I believe there were a number of transport aircraft airplanes. As far as I know, from friends who were assigned to the B-26 group and went to Vietnam there were no so called military advisors. U.S.A.F. people maintained the airplanes and the French flew them. Since I got that directly from the New York Times you'll have to explain it to them. If you post a site for the article I would be happy to critique it :-) I did a bit more reading and the only mention I can find of U.S. participation prior to 1954 was the use of U.S. aircraft and supply of military supplies. The U.S. Navy assisted to the extent of delivering aircraft to the French and in 1954 they assisted the French Navy in Operation Passage to Freedom, the transportation of N. Vietnamese who wished to leave the Communist North to go to the South. But maintenance crews can hardly be called combat troops would it? I never felt I was in the war until I was being shot at. What do you suppose that service cross was for? What "service cross"? the USAF Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded for: Who distinguishes himself or herself in support of operations by "heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in an aerial flight, subsequent to November 11, 1918" I don't remember a damn thing about it but I'm told that all those who served in a combat zone received a service cross. I was even shown a ribbon that would normally go on your uniform. Nope. If you served in a combat area you received a "service medal" to indicate that you had served in the theater, but that wasn't considered a "decoration", i.e., something that you got for actually doing something. It was more of "I was there, and here's the tee shirt" sort of thing. You'll have to explain that to the Air Force since I wasn't qualified for it until I went on an actual combat mission. The maintenance people that sat on Guam didn't. It ****ed off the two sargeants that volunteered to go there in order to gain points for being promoted. Not that it made any difference to me since I wasn't going to be promoted anyway. I think that you are going to be a great deal more specific here. Being stationed on Guam is not being stationed in Vietnam, thus no Vietnam Service Medal. If, on the other hand you participated in "combat" in Vietnam air space then you did qualify. I'm a bit curious about the two Sergeants who thought that by going to Guam they somehow earned promotion "points" for just being there as that certainly wasn't known to the people from Barksdale when "we" went to Guam for Arc Light. (I say "we" as my shop chief was having "wife problems" and volunteered to go and I stayed home to mind the store.) -- Cheers, John B. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 6:19:29 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 1 Sep 2017 07:09:52 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 6:59:42 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 06:26:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 7:32:43 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:04:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 6:52:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM, wrote: Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war mongers. Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc typically predated the president in office at the time (whether Republican or Democrat) the shooting started. Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan), invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush), inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan (GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger umbrella conflicts mentioned above. There were also conflicts that started under Democratic presidents, but Tom didn't declare that those didn't happen so I don't need to enumerate them. Eisenhower under treaty with France supplied military advisers to French Indochina as Vietnam was called then. Kennedy decided that America would be much better off with a war instead of looking on. You got it wrong again. In about 1950 the U.S. formed a so called Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) which managed the supply of some 10 million dollars in military equipment to support the French efforts in Vietnam. MAAG, by the way is simply a term used to denote a group which liaises with another government's military, that may or may not include advisers. As part of this "assistance" the U.S. loaned, lend leased, whatever you call it, some B-26 aircraft and supplied maintenance crews and parts for the airplanes, which were stationed at Saigon's airport. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Jobst
On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 07:27:58 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 6:19:29 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Fri, 1 Sep 2017 07:09:52 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 6:59:42 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 06:26:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 7:32:43 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:04:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 6:52:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM, wrote: Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war mongers. Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc typically predated the president in office at the time (whether Republican or Democrat) the shooting started. Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan), invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush), inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan (GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger umbrella conflicts mentioned above. There were also conflicts that started under Democratic presidents, but Tom didn't declare that those didn't happen so I don't need to enumerate them. Eisenhower under treaty with France supplied military advisers to French Indochina as Vietnam was called then. Kennedy decided that America would be much better off with a war instead of looking on. You got it wrong again. In about 1950 the U.S. formed a so called Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) which managed the supply of some 10 million dollars in military equipment to support the French efforts in Vietnam. MAAG, by the way is simply a term used to denote a group which liaises with another government's military, that may or may not include advisers. As part of this "assistance" the U.S. loaned, lend leased, whatever you call it, some B-26 aircraft and supplied maintenance crews and parts for the airplanes, which were stationed at Saigon's airport. these aircraft were flown by French flight crews. In addition I believe there were a number of transport aircraft airplanes. As far as I know, from friends who were assigned to the B-26 group and went to Vietnam there were no so called military advisors. U.S.A.F. people maintained the airplanes and the French flew them. Since I got that directly from the New York Times you'll have to explain it to them. If you post a site for the article I would be happy to critique it :-) I did a bit more reading and the only mention I can find of U.S. participation prior to 1954 was the use of U.S. aircraft and supply of military supplies. The U.S. Navy assisted to the extent of delivering aircraft to the French and in 1954 they assisted the French Navy in Operation Passage to Freedom, the transportation of N. Vietnamese who wished to leave the Communist North to go to the South. But maintenance crews can hardly be called combat troops would it? I never felt I was in the war until I was being shot at. What do you suppose that service cross was for? What "service cross"? the USAF Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded for: Who distinguishes himself or herself in support of operations by "heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in an aerial flight, subsequent to November 11, 1918" I don't remember a damn thing about it but I'm told that all those who served in a combat zone received a service cross. I was even shown a ribbon that would normally go on your uniform. Nope. If you served in a combat area you received a "service medal" to indicate that you had served in the theater, but that wasn't considered a "decoration", i.e., something that you got for actually doing something. It was more of "I was there, and here's the tee shirt" sort of thing. You'll have to explain that to the Air Force since I wasn't qualified for it until I went on an actual combat mission. The maintenance people that sat on Guam didn't. It ****ed off the two sargeants that volunteered to go there in order to gain points for being promoted. Not that it made any difference to me since I wasn't going to be promoted anyway. I think that you are going to be a great deal more specific here. Being stationed on Guam is not being stationed in Vietnam, thus no Vietnam Service Medal. If, on the other hand you participated in "combat" in Vietnam air space then you did qualify. I'm a bit curious about the two Sergeants who thought that by going to Guam they somehow earned promotion "points" for just being there as that certainly wasn't known to the people from Barksdale when "we" went to Guam for Arc Light. (I say "we" as my shop chief was having "wife problems" and volunteered to go and I stayed home to mind the store.) Firstly Guam was considered a war zone. Secondly I flew on bombing missions four times including the time we almost were hit by a SAM. To the best of my knowledge Guam was not considered a "war zone" during the Vietnam era. I might add that I was in the Air Force at the time and had a number of friends and fellow workers that served on Guam in support of the B-52's. None of them ever reported that they received any tax reduction, or other form of combat pay, for serving in a war zone. Nor did any of them wear a Vietnam ribbon on their Class A's. In fact people a lot closer to the guns, specifically Thailand, were not considered to be serving in a war zone. I had people, permanently assigned to a unit in Vietnam but working temporally in Thailand that were only paid combat pay and got the tax break if they physically were in Vietnam for at least one day during the month. I even flew the B52 when the AC had to take a leak and stretch. AF regs say that you have to have both seats filled when live bombs are on-board. That claim is simply ridiculous as the Air Force flew and probably still fly's quite a number of bomb loaded aircraft with only one pilot aboard. I don't suggest that you were not told that as, if I understand your posts correctly, you were some sort of civilian employee or employee of a contractor. In Air Force terms a "feather merchant" and normally view with considerable disdain. In some cases total disdain. I remember once being assured, by a Feather Merchant, that a certain job was "Impossible to do!". After it had been accomplished :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Jobst | Phil H | Techniques | 83 | July 13th 11 12:53 AM |
Is jobst gone? | Crescentius Vespasianus | Techniques | 7 | June 23rd 11 12:08 AM |
Jobst | Brad Anders | Racing | 20 | January 19th 11 06:31 PM |
Jobst | TriGuru55x11 | Rides | 1 | January 19th 11 02:13 PM |