Presidential Executive Order Amending EO 13223

a reply to: Aazadan

Too many pilots meet their commitment, and bail for the airlines. The Air Force was even trying to reach an agreement with them to share pilots, it got so bad.

There going to take out the Deep State AMEN

Interesting. I got out 21 years ago. They could recall me, but it seems like that would be a waste of time, especially since it would be cheaper and make more sense to train someone younger. This looks like it will affect more recent retirees and people who got out more recent. All branches of the military have been having problems with recruitment and retention. They have been doing waivers and dropping standards like crazy to make up for the shortfalls.

Are they also going to recall vets with less than 100% disability rating? If they do, that could get interesting.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: Fools

Correct, normally it's 4 years of active duty followed by 4 years of the reserves. If you've been in for 8 years or more you don't have to go to the reserves when you're done. Following 9/11 Bush revised the rules so that they could call people up, for up to 5 years after they had been discharged. This is a change to those rules, so that you can be called up at any time, for any reason.

The only reason to do such a thing, is that you're expecting millions of troops to be dying soon, or you want to use military rules to silence huge numbers of people. There is no reason to pass legislation that says we can put WW2 vets back into active service.

Why have you just completely dramatised and twisted something and made it sound like there is even a remote chance 90 year old men will ever be called back into service??

My opinion is that he's been told of Mother Natures disasters are going to be increasing to a point where mass riots will be taking place. The example of PR right now is a wake up call. Don't under estimate the President, he's actually one for the American people "FIRST". Hope this soaks in with all on ATS here.

I was at Iwakuni military base this year when the held "Friendship Day". I truly didn't see one fat soldier there wearing a uniform.

a reply to: nwtrucker

That's exactly what I was thinking. Some really good people, very selectively, were purged.

How many were purged that didn't want to go along , any longer, with the current endless war agenda?

'Purge's are a policy thing, not a capability thing.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: nwtrucker

That's exactly what I was thinking. Some really good people, very selectively, were purged.

How many were purged that didn't want to go along , any longer, with the current endless war agenda?

'Purge's are a policy thing, not a capability thing.

Maybe some. You call it a policy thing. Read that a political thing. Regarding capability, it's pretty obvious that our 'capability' diminished under Obama. Personnel is only one aspect. Yet cut that many officers and claim it doesn't affect capability?

a reply to: nwtrucker

You call it a policy thing. Read that a political thing.

Policy, politics, same thing. I remember the purges, it was right before they were gearing up for Syria.

Some Navy commanders didn't take to running air campaigns against a sovereign nation without a Mandate.

.o2

originally posted by: sg1642
Why have you just completely dramatised and twisted something and made it sound like there is even a remote chance 90 year old men will ever be called back into service??

Because they just changed the law to read exactly like that. Whether they would ever do it is another matter entirely. But they now can.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: sg1642
Why have you just completely dramatised and twisted something and made it sound like there is even a remote chance 90 year old men will ever be called back into service??

Because they just changed the law to read exactly like that. Whether they would ever do it is another matter entirely. But they now can.

The funny thing is this whole thread is intended as a hit on Trump. The actual subject matter receives no traction beyond pointing out the hyperbole of using this as some sort of communication inhibiter on the officers.

I suspect the lack of merit for this thread is based on the realization that Trump isn't going away...and perhaps even winning.

The OP can take comfort that he is joined by the left in grasping at straws....

a reply to: DJMSN

www.ucmj.us...

Brad from the comment section of this webpage said it best:

2.13.1. You have the right and duty as an American citizen to vote and to voice your opinions concerning political matters; however, you must be careful that your personal opinions and activities are not directly, or by implication, represented as those of the Air Force. Further, Article 88, UCMJ, prohibits commissioned officers from using contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a Military Department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the governor or legislature of any state, territory, commonwealth, or possession in which he or she is on duty or present. Enlisted personnel who make derogatory or disrespectful statements about political leaders may violate Article 134, UCMJ, when their military status is associated with the statements (such as making these comments on a social networking site where the member’s employment with the Air Force is also listed).

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: sg1642
Why have you just completely dramatised and twisted something and made it sound like there is even a remote chance 90 year old men will ever be called back into service??

Because they just changed the law to read exactly like that. Whether they would ever do it is another matter entirely. But they now can.

Can you quote the portion that lifts the age restriction for anybody and everybody that’s ever served? I still haven’t found anything about age, especially when it comes to 90 year olds that haven’t worn a uniform in 70 years.

How many of your crazy ass lefty president trump doom porn scenario, have come true you people are #ing pathetic

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Can you quote the portion that lifts the age restriction for anybody and everybody that’s ever served? I still haven’t found anything about age, especially when it comes to 90 year olds that haven’t worn a uniform in 70 years.

That's precisely why they can recall anyone. The amended EO no longer has language in it that limits recalls only to people who were discharged within the last X years.

There's still the issue if they would. A 90 year old clearly wouldn't be fit to be infantry anymore, and I suspect the military is responsible enough to know they need young and healthy people, not a bunch of retirees, and that they would medically discharge a bunch of 90 year olds if Trump did issue an order to reactivate them. That said, my opinion of the President is low enough that I wouldn't put it past him to try and weaponize it against specific people. Although right now it seems to mainly be aimed at the Air Force and their emergency need for pilots.

a reply to: Aazadan

As far as I can tell it pertains only to retired officers.

The guy who did four years enlisted in the mid 90s and got out isn’t any more subject to recall than he already was. Which is to say he’s not.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Shamrock6

They did, but it would be harder now.

Actually, enlisted folks are much better educated and trainable today than when enlisted pilots were last trained and used for manned flights. I’d think you might find some interested in learning to fly/flying without putting up with all the officer politics BS. All it would take is bring back the Warrant Officer ranks so the pilots would have authority to get things done. I realize there would be more to it than that, but I do think it would be very doable.

a reply to: Aazadan

a reply to: Lab4Us

And the culture is ingrained that officers fly, and enlisted don't. It was a totally different culture back in WWII. They were still finding their way, and defining aviation. They've had 70+ years to get away from that. It wouldn't work now, with the culture that the military has built.

The Air Force stopped allowing new Warrant Officers in 1960, and the last one retired in 1992, from the Air Force Reserve. It's not as easy as just saying "We're allowing Warrant Officers and they can fly".

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Aazadan

It happened to me after Nine-Eleven.

I swore an oath.

If they need an old, fat, grey-haired (not all bald) old man to work, then I work.


I did take my oath seriously, and if my spot takes the place of my son(s) or some one else's, then all the better.

I'm old.

I've lived my life.

I'll take a bullet.

THANK YOU.. When I signed I understood I could lose my life but I didn't know when I was discharged that the fine print at the bottom says:
"MAY BE REVOKED AT ANY TIME". I typed it in caps so I could read it better without a magnifying glass.


POTUS doesn't need an EO to do this.

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
Does anyone know if I could be recalled even if I was medically discharged? I've been out for 7 years... not really looking to go back on Active Duty. My back hurts...

All called back will be given physicals. I was in a MASH unit that gave them for part of my time in the service. If you're condition has improved you could be eligible to participate in operations. Passing minimum standards will be required. I am sure for us old soldiers we have to be given some modifications to the PT... LOL