On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 03:21:43PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > On Sunday, August 17, 2003, at 01:43 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote: > > >On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 02:04:09PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > >>On Sunday, August 17, 2003, at 12:33 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote: > >> > >>> Just heard about this local guy who reluctantly went to Iraq > >>>because > >>>he was in the reserves, now his contract is up (as of 7/31) and they > >>>won't let him out. > >>> > >> > >> > >>I've known for more than 40 years that there's always been language in > >>the deal the Reservists make that say they can be called back as > >>needed, in times of war. And kept in until not needed. > >> > >>If this guy didn't know that Reserve pay comes with strings attached, > >>he should have. > >> No sympathy from me. > >> > > > > That doesn't jive with the statutes: > > You said he was in the reserves. And that's what I commented on. > > Below you are quoting use of the _National Guard_.
Sorry, I mispoke -- he's in the Guard. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com