Why Wasn't Bush Drafted When He Failed To Meet His Guard Commitment?

[bigtree]

The service question
A review of President Bush's Guard years raises issues about the time he served

9/20/04 U.S.News & World Report- By Kit R. Roane

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/040920/usnews/20guard.htm

A review of the regulations governing Bush's Guard service during the Vietnam War shows that the White House used an inappropriate--and less stringent--Air Force standard in determining that he had fulfilled his duty. Because Bush signed a six-year "military service obligation," he was required to attend at least 44 inactive-duty training drills each fiscal year beginning July 1. But Bush's own records show that he fell short of that requirement, attending only 36 drills in the 1972-73 period, and only 12 in the 1973-74 period. The White House has said that Bush's service should be calculated using 12-month periods beginning on his induction date in May 1968. Using this time frame, however, Bush still fails the Air Force obligation standard.

Moreover, White House officials say, Bush should be judged on whether he attended enough drills to count toward retirement. They say he accumulated sufficient points under this grading system. Yet, even using their method, which some military experts say is incorrect, U.S. News 's analysis shows that Bush once again fell short. His military records reveal that he failed to attend enough active-duty training and weekend drills to gain the 50 points necessary to count his final year toward retirement.

The U.S. News analysis also showed that during the final two years of his obligation, Bush did not comply with Air Force regulations that impose a time limit on making up missed drills. What's more, he apparently never made up five months of drills he missed in 1972, contrary to assertions by the administration. White House officials did not respond to the analysis last week but emphasized that Bush had "served honorably."

Did Bush meet his committment to the Guard to recieve an honorable discharge? If he didn't meet the committment then why wasn't he called for active duty? Why wasn't he then subject to the draft?

>>>>>Bush signed his commitment to the Texas Air National Guard on May 27, 1968, shortly after becoming eligible for the draft. In his "statement of understanding," he acknowledged that "satisfactory participation" included attending "48 scheduled inactive-duty training periods" each year. He also acknowledged that he could be ordered to active duty if he failed to meet these requirements.

Old question. Still waiting for an answer from Bush. Is he "proud" that he misused the National Guard to dodge the draft?

[Heath.Hunnicutt]

1. I think he WAS

If you look at my web page (http://ofb.net/~bushsr) you'll see that Bush did a lot of Active Duty in May of 1973. More than he'd ever done before. According to his 10 May 1973 Uniform Personnel Report, he began a special period of supervision during a special project that began 1 May 1973. Was that special project training for the infantry?

What two details are censored from his 19-page Uniform Personnel Report?
(a) GWB's Social Security Number
(b) The identity of GWB's supervising officer during May 1973

I found his social security number elsewhere, but who he reported to in May 1973 is a Secret.

[bigtree]

2. Could have just as probably been drug rehabilitation

That's why Bush should be forced to release his medical records from the period in question. What is Bush trying to hide? Do you seriously believe that the military would have any use for a soldier who repeatedly refused to follow orders?

[Lefty48197]

3. I think the special project was...

making up for lost time, so he could fulfill the minimum requirements, and get an "honorable" discharge.

[bigtree]

5. The report says

". . . he apparently never made up five months of drills he missed in 1972."

[Heath.Hunnicutt]

9. What report are you talking about?

Are you talking about the news report or his 10 May 1973, Uniform Personel Report?

The military document states the reason for the special project in May 1973 is "NO RPT 1 YR", whatever that stands for.

The report I am talking about is in a PDF from USA Today.

Here is a link to page 4 of his 10 May 1973 UPR, see section 17, about 80% down the page: OER-DATA

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/9-Miscellaneous.pdf#page=16

[bigtree]

4. Also, according to the report

". . . as the Vietnam War wound down, his performance slumped, and his attendance at required drills fell off markedly."

[sam sarrha]

6. they were glad to see the fuck'n preppy drug addict moron finally leave

[calimary]

7. KICK!

These questions MUST be asked. If the others are being asked, then THESE, TOO!

[nomaco-10]

8. I grew up in that era. Anyone that had money and was...

politically connected, didn't go. That's how it was and that's how it will always be. The thing is, if your "Poppy" wanted to ensure a future political career for their little dipshit, or protect their own political aspirations, it got handled. Depending on your level of importance and connections, your brat didn't go, but was able to still have something for their military resume. Others, not so well connected, pulled actual duty for short periods of time in safe areas outside of active military combat, desk jobs etc.

Viet Nam was fought by the poor, the uneducated and the numbers on the front lines were disproportionately black. There was a class system then and it still exists today. It's just not as obvious since the draft has not been reenacted since that horrific time in our history, that is not yet

[Green Lantern]

10. The key point in the last paragraph above

notes that if he failed to perform satisfactorily, he could be called to active duty.
I see two possibilities for his not reporting for AD.
1) Daddy bought him out of it with a detached duty thing, perhaps through the CIA, giving him almost ironclad cover from scrutiny.

2) He was such a screwup they didn't want him jeopardizing the lives of other troops, and just let jhim go.

[DeepModem Mom]

11. kick

[imax2268]

12. One word...

Daddy...

[Skinner]

13. Apparently US News didn't get the memo.

We're not supposed to be talking about the whole AWOL thing. The "forged" memos have discredited all of this stuff. :eyes:

[bigtree]

14. I love the way Killian's secretary slammed Bush

"The information in these memos is correct"

"It was General Staudt, not then Lt. Colonel Hodges , that was putting on the pressure to whitewash Bush. For instance he didnt take his flight examination or his physical. And the pilots had to take them by their birthdays. Once in a while there would be a reason why a pilot would miss these things because some of them were commercial pilots. But they had to make arrangements to take their exams. Once in a while they might be late, but there would be a good excuse for it and let the commander know and try to set up a date for a make-up. If they did not take that physical, they were off flying status until they did.”

“Bush seemed to be having a good time"

"I think it is plain and simple. Bush didn't think that he had to go by the rules that others did.”

"He had this campaign to take care of, and that's what he was going to do -- and that's what he did do.”

[Willy Mugobeer]

15. You're all familiar with Paul Lukasiak's work?

Start here:

http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm

It's a long read but absolutely worth it. Paul does a great job dissecting the paper trail of what happened AFTER Bushie was suspended as a pilot.