Where Was W Waldo?

The problem with this as a rebuttal is that we were talking about the payroll report, which means we were talking in terms of pay purposes; so even including Inactive Reserve service, Bush only met 5 years and 4 months of his 6 year committment.Yes, Inactive Reserve service counts. Even including that, Bush failed to meet his commitment by 8 months. You still haven't supported your claim that Bush met his service committment. The fact that desertion papers were never filed against the son of a war hero and Senator, and future President of the United States, is irrelevant. They should have been filed, but they were not because of the political influence of the Bush family.

When he asked to move to Harvard, still 8 months shy of his service commitment, he signed an affidavit that he would report to the Mass. National Guard.He never did. A month later he asked for a discharge, still 8 months shy of meeting his commitment, and it was granted. Where it should have specified the length of service on his discharge form, it instead said "indefinite", even though he actually had committed to a definite amount of time.He was discharged 8 months shy of meeting his 6 year commitment. Tal's attempt to cloud the issue with a lack of AWOL papers on Bush is irrelevant; it was his family's influence that got him the discharge in the first place so why would AWOL papers have been filed? He was discharged. He wasn't in the National Guard any more, inactive or not.His pay records show that he was 8 months short; his retirement papers corroborate that. Bush did not serve the full term of his commitment in either Active or Inactive reserve status.This isn't that hard to follow, people.

No, he was discharged from inactive status 8 months early. He never met his commitment; at least, there's absolutely no paperwork that shows that he did. Neither I nor CBS ever claimed that Bush was moved to AWOL status, so the lack of those documents disproves something that was never asserted had occurred.Regardless, Bush was 8 months short of his service commitment. That's proven by his payroll record, his retirement credit record, and his faulty discharge papers, and that's simply the last word on the subject. There's absolutely no evidence that Bush met his service commitment in Inactive status or by any other means. You have yet to present any evidence that Bush met his obligation under IRR or any other status.

Look, Tal, maybe a diagram will make it make sense to you. See the brown bit at the end? That's the part he skipped out on - the 8 months between his discharge and the end of his agreed commitment.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Changed overwide graphic to a thumbnail.

Except that his discharge papers have false information, so he was discharged improperly.You're really digging, Tal, and you're not making any sense. He failed to meet his obligations. That his family influence was enough to get people not to complain about it is irrelevant, setting aside the fact that many of his commanders did complain about it.He didn't meet his obligations. Can you explain why, after signing a legally-binding pledge to report to a duty station in Mass. he failed to ever do so?