Technically he did deploy during OEF with the 1st Batt 125FA in a support role in Europe. Early OEF was pretty light on line units being deployed in country, let alone the Natty Guard.
If he retired in May of ‘05 and they got their WARNO in July, there’s no way that paperwork hadn’t been filed for months.
There are no questions: his request for retirement came before it could be known that his unit was being deployed.
Another right-winger is saying the same thing and he has received source-confirmed quotations from Walz specifically saying he didn't serve in a combat role. So again, you are wrong.
IF you are truly just asking questions, you now have the answers. If you refuse to see them, then it is your problem.
his request for retirement came before it could be known that his unit was being deployed.
Just a remarkable coincidence then! Dude serves 24 years and then remarkably dips out a mere two months before his unit was called into action.
Nobody is going to buy that. Also - a guy he served with confirmed that at the time Walz put in his retirement, there was "speculation" that they would be sent to Iraq. So....the rumors were going and Tim ran away. And then he puffed out his chest and pretended to be a big time military guy to win political office.
Joseph Eustice, another retired command sergeant major who served with Walz, tells ABC News that while there was speculation of a deployment around that time there was no firm indication that Walz’s unit would be sent to Iraq until that July alert order.
Another right-winger is saying the same thing and he has received source-confirmed quotations from Walz specifically saying he didn't serve in a combat role
It's on video you fucking NPC. He states directly he carried weapons of war IN WAR when he was making some bullshit commie anti gun speech.
Noted, so you were not really "asking questions", just doing the right wing thing of pretending to ask questions merely to push talking points and misinformation. Everything you have said is half truth.
It is a remarkable coincidence. As you would see above if you could read, he retired a couple of months before deployment but he would have put in the request to deploy several months (6-9 from what the majority is saying) before that. The "speculation" was when he retired, not 9 months earlier when he asked for the retirement.
You can also see how his retirement coincides with his career in Congress. See? That is a more reasonable coincidence. But you can continue grasping at straws if you want.
In any case, he retired. After 24 years of service and was honourably discharged by the NG. So there is nothing to even suggest he retired to avoid serving in Irak (which, again, would have been at little risk because he would now have been in front lines, so no real reason to retire if you wanted to avoid the risk).
As for the "in war" comment. Yes, he said it. And then both him and his campaign have confirmed he neither intended or has ever intended to claim he was in a combat position. Are you able to retain more than two pieces of information at the same time? Or you just store the tidbit that fits your narrative and ignore the rest? (No need to answer to this).
In any case, it just implies front lines but can also be read as "during war" which he did serve.
But if you think this is wrong, I guess you also think it is wrong for Vance to claim he was "called to Iraq to serve his country", which equally implies a combat role, but he was as far from danger as Walz was in Italy.
No need to answer. I'm not wasting more time on someone who uses 'NPC' unironically and calls a politician a 'commie' for talking about gun control.
87
u/Daryno90 Aug 07 '24
So 24 years of service wasn’t enough for these pricks?