What you're supposed to do when you get one is to start taking appropriate steps to prepare for the command, in this case to prepare to deploy on a combat mission to Iraq. What you're not supposed to do is use the warning to figure out how to evade the command.
Two retired Command Sergeants Major accuse our new VP nominee of having done the latter.
On May 16th, 2005 he quit, leaving the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion and its Soldiers hanging; without its senior Non-Commissioned Officer, as the battalion prepared for war. His excuse to other leaders was that he needed to retire in order to run for congress. Which is false, according to a Department of Defense Directive, he could have run and requested permission from the Secretary of Defense before entering active duty; as many reservists have. If he had retired normally and respectfully, you would think he would have ensured his retirement documents were correctly filled out and signed, and that he would have ensured he was reduced to Master Sergeant for dropping out of the academy. Instead he waited for the paperwork to catch up to him. His official retirement document states, SOLDIER NOT AVAILABLE FOR SIGNATURE.On September 10th, 2005 conditionally promoted Command Sergeant Major Walz was reduced to Master Sergeant. It took a while for the system to catch up to him as it was uncharted territory, literally no one quits in the position he was in, or drops out of the academy. Except him....The 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion was deployed for 22 months in 2006 - 2007. During this time, they were restricted by Army regulations and could not speak out against a candidate for office. In November 2006 he was elected to the House of Representatives.
Is it true? Well, he doesn't deny it.
A spokesperson for Walz previously said this topic has been covered before and referred Alpha News to a past story where Walz said “normally this type of partisan political attack only comes from one who’s never worn a uniform.”
Yeah? Ask John F. Kerry about what happens to those who betray their comrades in arms.
2 comments:
Oh, this is "old news" and is "only brought out as a partisan attack."
Which means it's true.
That “22 months” is not a typo, though that is the whole activation; 16 of those months were spent in combat operations inside Iraq. 16 months in a combat zone is a L-O-N-G time.
No wonder they are sore about their senior enlisted leader abandoning them to that fate while he left to pursue his own personal power and glory (and wealth, which always attends Congressional offices these days).
Post a Comment