It’s all service inflation. Everyone was at war. Everyone got a medal. Everyone was a hero.
I’m not sure anymore. It’s all relative I suppose. I was in some hairy situations but I’m not sure it was war. Not like Ukraine is experiencing.This brings up an interesting question about semantics. You say you weren't in combat, but were you "in war?" For example, I frequently say that I am a "war vet" but not a "combat vet," because to me they are two different things.
This brings up an interesting question about semantics. You say you weren't in combat, but were you "in war?" For example, I frequently say that I am a "war vet" but not a "combat vet," because to me they are two different things.
Sure. But in my opinion, a CSM should do better.The military is one part of any persons life. If life lines up a certain way, and you want to get out, fucking get out.
Sure. But in my opinion, a CSM should do better.
I think it is pretty well established that he was. Even the Harris/Walz campaign says so.Well was he a CSM or not?
On its website, the Harris campaign axed a reference to Walz as a “retired command sergeant major” and now says that he once served at the command sergeant major rank
I think it is pretty well established that he was.
I'm not sure who "we" is, but I don't think I ever said that. I hope I didn't. He was disingenuous about saying he retired as a CSM, because he didn't, and that has now been corrected. And I personally believe he was extremely disingenuous to lead people on about serving "in war."But we were just saying that he was actually not, and him saying he was, was disingenuous
I'm not sure who "we" is, but I don't think I ever said that. I hope I didn't. He was disingenuous about saying he retired as a CSM, because he didn't, and that has now been corrected. And I personally believe he was extremely disingenuous to lead people on about serving "in war."
He was a CSM, but he didn't retire as a CSM. He held himself out as something he wasn't for years, until literally this week when he felt compelled to change it. I don't think that's a little thing. Reasonable people can disagree and that's fine.I agree with you.
However, I think it is picking nits pretty hard to be wearing CSM rank the day you retire but then say you weren’t a SGM.
He was a CSM, but he didn't retire as a CSM. He held himself out as something he wasn't for years, until literally this week when he felt compelled to change it. I don't think that's a little thing. Reasonable people can disagree and that's fine.
Sure. But in my opinion, a CSM should do better.
Touche!Well was he a CSM or not?
This. When people ask how many deployments I have it’s one number, when my 214 and record say more. Because I only count what we called ‘combat deployments’ in those.Yeah I got hazard pay and one of my trips to SA was technically part of OEF…however while I would call those deployments, they weren’t combat.