Serving in Carter's Army

[headhuntersix]

In case u wonder why I hate Obama so much...because he's Carter but worse....


Carters' Army
Well, I remember watching my team sergeant writing with a pen insert. Take a government issue, ball point, click-type pen, once the pen body cracks, no replacements. When we ordered pens, we got the insides only. So, imagine writing with just the insides of the pens. A bunch of grown men, in isolation, planning their war plans in case of WWIII (10th Group type of guy) using only the pen inserts because the government was too cheap.

AW (as in, AW-350 AssWipe- 350 sheets), no replacement roll if you don't provide the empty core. So, after awhile, you bring in the empty cores from home so you can get replacements for the team room. Oops, not the same as the issue ones? No TP for you son. Eventually, you end up bringing it in from home.

Light bulbs, same thing. Bring in the burnt out or broken one for a one-for-one DX. No bulb, no replacement. I think the only reason they didn't do a Statement of Charges for broken bulbs was they couldn't justify lowering the dollar amount required to allow filing a Statement of Charges.

So, team fund starts paying for common, admin supplies to do business with. Pens, paper, pencils, highlighters, etc. Training slowed down in the 3rd quarter to insure that we'd have enough supplies for anything (like a surprise EDRE from higher) that might show up in the 4th quarter. Then, last month of the fiscal year, we're having convoys up and down the roads of Massachusetts to burn up the MoGas we've been hoarding. We can't carry it over and now we need to use it or lose it for the next fiscal year.

Gear was issued (TA-50) that wasn't in good enough shape to be turned in. Meaning, if you went around the building to the other side to turn it right back in, you'd be charged for the gear not being in good repair. We got it in substandard shape and had to turn it in better than it was issued or be charged for it. Or, do without. Try standing an AGI without a lot of your TA-50, in a tactical unit. You can technically do it, but you have to have all the documentation on hand showing why. With the subsequent load upon your chain of command. Who turns around and reminds you that you're SF, "grow up and buy what you need".  Wives that could sew were asked if we bought sleeping bag kits from North Face, would they sew them for us? So we could afford some Polar Guard sleeping bags with Gore Tex covers. It was stupid how we cheaped ourselves.

This what you're looking for?

Mark G. Besch
USA, MSG (Ret)
10th SFG(A)

[headhuntersix]

 was an Army captain-aviator during the Carter regime.  I spent most of his term in US Army, Europe where I was stationed at Coleman Barracks, Mannheim, Germany followed by an assignment as a Battalion Logistics Staff Officer (S-4) for the 19th Aviation Battalion, a composite battalion containing 2 CH-47 companies, and  an Assault Helicopter Company (UH-1).

During this period, we were virtually starving due to the incredibly low pay resultant from Carter's 13% stagflation rate.  I bought my first home and was tickled to get a mortgage at all, the 16% interest, not withstanding.

Operationally, it was terrible.  We had aircraft we could not fly because we had no budget for spare/repair parts.  We had vehicles we could not drive because we had no funding for gas or maintenance.  Morale was terrible among the junior enlisted, many of whom would have been eligible for food stamps except for being overseas.  Among the company grade officers, morale was likewise poor.  I hoped aloud to my friends that I would get caught in one of the numerous RIFs (reduction In forces) that gave the selected de-accessed officers $5K for each year of service up to a max of $25K.

But, alas, that was not to be.  And when Ronaldus Maximus was elected, relief was at hand almost over night.

I have always thought little of my fellow Georgian, Carter.  He was feckless while in office, was a miserable Commander in chief and has been a borderline traitor since leaving office.

Tom Armstrong

Col. (Ret) USA

[240 is Back]

HH6, you're passionate about this anti-Obama thing.  I like it!  As long as you stick around and defend your article - and you do - it's great.

When some guys post long articles from RUSH, then disappear when their article is owned, that gets a little old.

[CQ]

HH6, you're passionate about this anti-Obama thing.  I like it!  As long as you stick around and defend your article - and you do - it's great.

When some guys post long articles from RUSH, then disappear when their article is owned, that gets a little old.

I will give credit where credit is due, that is a good point.

[headhuntersix]

Well..i have to work...sorta and I hit the gym at lunch..then head home and run...so between that I try and defend my shit.  CQ mentioned that I've been negative lately. Soory boys...McCain isn't much better on alot of issues. I liked Mitt.

[OzmO]

Well..i have to work...sorta and I hit the gym at lunch..then head home and run...so between that I try and defend my shit.  CQ mentioned that I've been negative lately. Soory boys...McCain isn't much better on alot of issues. I liked Mitt.

choices sure suck don't they?

A pandering whiney whore or a clueless idealist.

[headhuntersix]

Wonderful...there is always 2012..unless the world ends.

[24KT]

So these are valid reasons why those soldiers were pissed serving in Carter's army.

Why do you hate Obama? ...other than your previously stated reason that he's a Black man named Obama?

How is he Carter only worse?

[War-Horse]

Carter has helped build alot of Habitat for humanity homes.   We need people like that.

[240 is Back]

In case u wonder why I hate Obama so much...because he's Carter but worse....

Carter hasn't been President in 28 years.

Today's voters would have to be 40 or older, just to have been aware of the world under Carter, or history majors, who already eithe rembrace/despise our impirical nature. 

In other words, not a lot of "oh shit, I'm gonna change my vote cause I hate that dude Carter!"

[Dos Equis]

It's too bad Carter couldn't go straight to ex-president.  He has been much better since leaving office.  

[240 is Back]

It's too bad Carter couldn't go straight to ex-president.  He has been much better since leaving office.  

I'm sure Bush will continue to give back to America once he leaves office.

I wonder if he'll build houses too?

[CARTEL]

It kills me that Carter is one of the worst Presidents ever, yet has railed against every President after him.

Guy should shut his pie-hole and build me a 2 bed, 2 bath cottage.

[War-Horse]

It kills me that Carter is one of the worst Presidents ever, yet has railed against every President after him.

Guy should shut his pie-hole and build me a 2 bed, 2 bath cottage.

I take it your 50 yrs old to remember this?

[CARTEL]

I take it your 50 yrs old to remember this?

There are things called "books"

There are even classes that teach history.

You can even watch old footage.

And what's worse is that you are alive today and still have no clue whats going on right now.

[headhuntersix]

I have served with guys who grew up In Carters army. It was literally like one minute there was nothing, no parts, no training dollars and the next a flood of cash and parts with Reagan. Guys in Korea couldn't move out of their motorpools because of the boxes of shit that were coming in. Carter had a series of failed appeasement policies. Obama is saying all the same things. There does not appear to be a Reagan to save us after Obama fucks everything up.

[240 is Back]

Carter had a series of failed appeasement policies.

Please list them.

[headhuntersix]

Indeed, it seems there are very few dictators in the world to whose defense Carter has not rallied -- Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, former Yugoslav strongman Marshal Josef Tito, former Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceaucescu, former Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos, former Pakistani General Zia ul-Haq, former North Korean dictator Kim Il Sung and now his son Kim Jong Il, to name a few.

Carter's eagerness to appease the former Soviet Union and his opposition to his successor President Ronald Reagan's uncompromising approach (which has been widely credited with helping bring down the "evil empire") also speak to his lack of understanding when it comes to the nature of totalitarian regimes. Then there's Carter's propensity for certifying obviously compromised elections in places such as Venezuela and Haiti.

Carter's failed approach to foreign policy has indeed put America in a perilous position in the world. If we look at some of the major challenges facing the United States today, we can thank Jimmy Carter for getting us off on the wrong foot. Whether it's the Middle East, Iran or North Korea, Carter's track record as president is nothing to brag about and his career as ex-president has been even worse.

[headhuntersix]

Mr Carter transformed US policy by insisting that human rights be placed at the top of the agenda - with disastrous results.

The main reason the Shah of Iran, a key ally in Washington's attempts to keep the Soviet Union at bay in the Gulf, had managed to survive was the ruthless efficiency of his CIA-trained Savak security service. But after Mr Carter hosted a state visit in Washington for the Shah and Empress of Iran in November 1977, the Pahlavi dynasty was encouraged to release hundreds of political prisoners, with the result that, two years later, the Shah was overthrown by Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic revolution. We are still trying to come to terms with the consequences.

One of the less appealing aspects of Mr Obama's campaign has been the support he has attracted from Mr Carter who, seemingly oblivious to his handling of the Iran debacle (which culminated in 66 Americans being held hostage in Tehran for 444 days), has not been shy about offering his advice. Mr Carter was at it again this week, counselling Mr Obama against making Hillary Clinton his running mate.

Like Mr Carter, Mr Obama is an outsider who was relatively unknown before he decided to make his run for the White House. And like Mr Carter, Mr Obama appears determined to undertake a radical change in the way Washington does business with the outside world; changes that could have the same disastrous consequences for America and the rest of the world as Mr Carter's policy.

[headhuntersix]

First, Carter's post-inaugural pledge "to withdraw American ground troops from Korea," coming just two years after our defeat in Vietnam, sent shock waves through our Pacific allies and emboldened our chief adversaries.

Second, Carter's embarrassingly moralistic and naive speech in May 1977 at Notre Dame accused the U.S. of too often adopting the "flawed tactics of our adversaries, sometimes abandoning our own values for theirs." This naive version of moral equivalence nourished the arrogance of the "evil empire" and perplexed our allies.

[Decker]

Mr Carter transformed US policy by insisting that human rights be placed at the top of the agenda - with disastrous results.

The main reason the Shah of Iran, a key ally in Washington's attempts to keep the Soviet Union at bay in the Gulf, had managed to survive was the ruthless efficiency of his CIA-trained Savak security service. But after Mr Carter hosted a state visit in Washington for the Shah and Empress of Iran in November 1977, the Pahlavi dynasty was encouraged to release hundreds of political prisoners, with the result that, two years later, the Shah was overthrown by Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic revolution. We are still trying to come to terms with the consequences.

One of the less appealing aspects of Mr Obama's campaign has been the support he has attracted from Mr Carter who, seemingly oblivious to his handling of the Iran debacle (which culminated in 66 Americans being held hostage in Tehran for 444 days), has not been shy about offering his advice. Mr Carter was at it again this week, counselling Mr Obama against making Hillary Clinton his running mate.

Like Mr Carter, Mr Obama is an outsider who was relatively unknown before he decided to make his run for the White House. And like Mr Carter, Mr Obama appears determined to undertake a radical change in the way Washington does business with the outside world; changes that could have the same disastrous consequences for America and the rest of the world as Mr Carter's policy.

The world needs more Tyranny!  Less human rights and more cleansing of undesirable elements.

Sometimes you post things that surprise me as to its depth of depravity and lack of humanity.  This is one of those times.

Justifying Iran's death squads?  That's sad.

Reagan had the right idea in trading with Iran behind the US government's back.

[headhuntersix]

Letting go of the Canal. This penultimate Jimmy Carter blunder still hasn't played itself out completely. Today, both the Atlantic and Pacific ports of the canal are managed by the Chinese, who are working hard to expand their influence in Central and South America. Carter not only allowed the Chinese a foothold through the Torrijos-Carter Treaties; he have them the most strategically important real estate on the continent as their foothold.

Yeah as opposed to all the misery and death that fanatical Iranian or those back by Iran are causing. Sometime ur naivity surprises me. The world does not operate on a level playing field...either we get em or they get us.

[240 is Back]

Wow, carter was quite the fucckkup.  I agree there.

What has Obama stated he will do, that you qualify as appeasement?

(Rember the difference between negotiation and appeasement - appeasement is actually GIVING the enemy something, as Carter did, as a result of negotiations.  Two different things)

[Decker]

Letting go of the Canal. This penultimate Jimmy Carter blunder still hasn't played itself out completely. Today, both the Atlantic and Pacific ports of the canal are managed by the Chinese, who are working hard to expand their influence in Central and South America. Carter not only allowed the Chinese a foothold through the Torrijos-Carter Treaties; he have them the most strategically important real estate on the continent as their foothold.

Yeah as opposed to all the misery and death that fanatical Iranian or those back by Iran are causing. Sometime ur naivity surprises me. The world does not operate on a level playing field...either we get em or they get us.

You are comparing the sabre rattling rhetoric of Ahmadinejad to the murdering, torturing, democracy killing death squads of the Shah of Iran...?

That's not appropriate.

[Decker]

Letting go of the Canal. This penultimate Jimmy Carter blunder still hasn't played itself out completely. Today, both the Atlantic and Pacific ports of the canal are managed by the Chinese, who are working hard to expand their influence in Central and South America. Carter not only allowed the Chinese a foothold through the Torrijos-Carter Treaties; he have them the most strategically important real estate on the continent as their foothold.

...

Doesn't the treaty reserve the permanent right to the US to defend the Canals from any threat?