About the Tim Walz retirement....
A person who has served 20 years and, in this case, deployed in support of the war, has a right to do whatever is in the best interest of himself/herself. And the decision to not be deployed again does not devalue their service. People retire all the time from the military; and having some shit about it is complete nonsense.
Tim Walz re-entered service, after being retired already, to support the war; and he deployed to Italy at that time. From the stupid Internet perspective, that 20 years, re-entry, and deployment, all mean nothing because he retired before going back overseas? GTFO with that nonsense.
I joined the Army 40 days after 9/11. I was 31 years old in basic training. I volunteered to deploy to Iraq in 2004 and spent 10 months there, until Dec 2004. I saw a lot of people eligible for service choose not to go - alright with me. I saw a lot of people in the service get out - alright with me.
And the bull about his rank? Retirement is very often at a rank below the highest one held, this is a regular occurrence in the military. He was promoted to sergeant major, he had to take classes for the rank (also a very regular occurrence) and decided to retire, again, before doing so, so his retirement rank is the one he completed - master sergeant. He has the longest military service of anyone to ever be nominated to run for President or Vice President - 24 years of service. Believe whatever nonsense you want, but "he ran from service" is a silly argument, especially when compared to the other people running.
Finally- and for you to understand my point- I watched a man for whom I had a lot of respect - Major in the JAG corps - return home and resign his commission after taking fire in Iraq one morning. I was in the bunk next to him when the shelling started. I beat him (and nearly everyone else, because I wanted to live and I was fast) into the bunker, where we all stayed during the attack (even the really tough guys), and talked to him on my way to breakfast (as he had stayed in the bunker after the attack).
His choice was his choice, he earned it. There is no shame in not wanting to go to war- it's not for everyone. There's no shame in being deployed and deciding you don't want to go back- it's not for everyone. My Major earned his rank and right to decide what was best for him. Any challenge to that, by anyone, is a gross disrespect for those that give themselves to service of their country.
Tim Walz served his country, honorably, for 20 years. He retired and came back to serve after 9/11 and again served honorably, including being deployed to Italy in support of the mission. He retired once again before his unit was deployed, after 24 years of honorable service.
If you attack this man for his choice to retire a second time, when he wanted to, you are misguided at best. Stop being a sheep. Challenge the man's beliefs and policies if you so desire, but honor his service for what it is. Or just be honest and say you have no respect for military service and move on with your life.
= new reply since forum marked as read