Good, Bad, and Ugly
Reader reaction to Reuters news
Gone, but not retired
Jobless veterans say military experience is not valued
Rick Combs, a 27-year old who retired as a Sergeant in the Army, says he was given management training in the military as part of becoming a Sergeant. So far, that training has not translated into a comparable private-sector job.
Your writer doesn’t seem to have any knowledge of the military.
No one who is 27 years old can retire from the Army. One must serve a full 20 years to qualify for “retirement.” I doubt Combs joined at 7 years of age.
Wayne S. USAF (ret.)
We corrected it to make clear he was not retired. I’m not exactly sure why sergeant was upper cased, either: GBU Editor
A drill sergeant scolds one of his recruits inside the soldiers barracks during basic training at the Fort Sill Army Post in Fort Sill, Oklahoma November 5, 2009. REUTERS/Jessica Rinaldi
The wrong rank…
British Royal Air Force “Red Arrows” plane crashes, pilot dies
Egging, known as “Eggman” according to Captain Simon Blake, Commandant of the RAF’s Central Flying School, joined the team last year.
You referred to the officer commanding the Red Arrows as ‘captain’.
His rank is Group Captain, the RAF equivalent of full colonel.
You need to get this sort of thing right the first time.
J.V.B.
Yes. We corrected it for the original news feed, but the corrected version didn’t show up on reuters.com for several days. Not our finest hour: GBU Editor
Winning a medal?
Army Ranger to be second living Medal of Honor recipient
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama is set to award a Medal of Honor on Tuesday afternoon to Army Ranger Sergeant 1st Class Leroy Petry, the second living soldier to win the military’s highest decoration for actions in Afghanistan.
Petry, originally from New Mexico, is among nine servicemen from the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts to win the award — given for “conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty.”
Today in Reuters News on the internet you have this story about an American Army Ranger who is going to receive the United States Of America’s highest military honor. The Medal Of Honor.
In this story it is printed that this individual won the medal.
I am a war veteran of the Vietnam War and I find this a disgrace to all those men and women who serve in our military here in the USA and around the world.
We all know that the correct reporting is to say the individual is a recipient or is awarded the medal. Those in the military are not playing a game to win anything. They are just doing their jobs.
“…the second living soldier to EARN the military’s highest decoration…” would also have been a valid statement. Recipients are awarded that medal because they earned it.
Ignoring Canada?
Allies vow no halt to campaign until Gaddafi goes
Washington, which led the campaign in its first week, has since turned over command to NATO and taken a back seat role. Britain and France complain that other NATO allies have not provided enough fire power to take out Gaddafi’s armour and allow the rebels in control of the east to sweep him from power.
Once again you have omitted Canada’s contribution to the Libyan conflict.
It is my understanding that at the present time we have 12 F-18 fighters, 2 air refeulers and 2 long range patrol Aurora aircraft, as well as a Navy Frigate participating in this conflict.
I have yet to see “Canada” mentioned in any or your reports. Can you explain why?
Darrel
Sorry, we don’t mention all seven countries in every story about the joint effort, but we do not ignore Canada. I find a number of recent references, including a couple here. GBU Editor
They’re all jets…
Libyan rebels rout Gaddafi forces in strategic town
The French armed forces said around 20 French aircraft supported by an AWACS surveillance plane struck targets during the day on Saturday, including five Galeb fighter jets and two MI-35 helicopters on the ground outside Misrata.
Come on guys, is it the public reading your articles or is the problem your reporters?
Take a look at the designation of fighter aircraft (F-4, F-5, F-14, F15, F-16 etc etc) Why is it the non-military folks call it a “fighter jet” and nobody in the military does it?
There isn’t a country on the planet that has a “fighter prop.”
Isn’t it easier to call it what it is? Isn’t it obvious the aircraft uses turbine engines and not props?
How weak-minded has everybody become ?
Wait a minute… There aren’t any prop fighters active nowadays? I find that hard to believe…
Pearl Harbor?
I have been looking over your site today and cannot find a single article relating to Pearl Harbor day in the U.S.
Am I missing something?
Eric
Yes. We had a nice feature on Pearl Harbor survivors on Monday.
Apart from that, I expect you’ll see more attention next year, for the 70th anniversary: GBU Editor
Pearl Harbor survivor Louis Conter poses at the Hale Koa hotel in Honolulu, Hawaii December 4, 2010. Reuters/Hugh Gentry
Nuclear powered?
China says won’t take sides in Korea dispute
As the nuclear powered USS George Washington headed out of Korean waters back to Japan, oil traders said the US Navy was seeking a medium-range oil tanker to …
U.S. Navy to ship jet fuel from Japan to Korea
The Yonhap news agency said on Wednesday that South Korea was planning more military drills as the nuclear powered USS George Washington moved out of Korean waters back to Japan.
China says North Korea ties survived “tempests”
The director of the National Intelligence Service, Won Sei-hoon, told a parliamentary committee meeting the North was likely to attack again once a U.S. flotilla, led by a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, had left the region after military maneuvers with the South.
I was wonder why you, Associated Press and seemingly all other news organizations seem to always make a point of referring to the USS George Washington as a ‘nuclear powered’ aircraft carrier.
Erin,
We do not have, and never have had, a “diesel powered USS Missouri”.
Not the Air Force
Four killed in US Air Force plane crash in Alaska
In light of the accident, Atkins said, the military was considering whether to go on with the aviation show, which also features precision-flying demonstrations by the Air Force’s Blue Angels and the Canadian Forces Snowbirds.
In the article on the plane crash, 28 July 2010, at Elmendorf you refer to the Air Force Blue Angels. The Blue Angels are in the NAVY. The Air Force has the Thunderbirds. Some folks get all shook up about this sort of thing.
S.P.
Several readers called this to our attention. We corrected: GBU Editor
The U.S. Navy Blue Angels precision flying team flies above San Francisco Bay in their F/A-18 Hornet jets during Fleet Week in San Francisco, in a 2007 file photo. REUTERS/Robert Galbraith
Not Marines
A June 6 Reuters video report said that “U.S. Marines and Iraq” were working together in Basra.
However, the U.S. military members WERE U.S. NAVY RIVERINES, NOT MARINES. As the PAO for the Little Creek, Virginia-based Riverine squadrons, I’m requesting a correction be made to give these men the credit they deserve.
Barbara Albritton
We replaced that report with a corrected version which did identify the Riverines: GBU Editor
Separating the chaff from the chafe…
SPECIAL REPORT-How the White House learned to love the drone
WASHINGTON, May 18 (Reuters) – By all appearances, the Obama administration wanted him alive, not dead.
The Obama White House chaffs at suggestions its policies could make it harder to capture wanted militants.
This is the wrong word. You meant to say chafes.
Nova
Indeed: GBU Editor
An MQ-1B Predator from the 46th Expeditionary Reconnaissance Squadron takes off from Balad Air Base in Iraq in a 2008 file photo. REUTERS/U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Julianne Showalter/Handout
-
Resident Mediafile Expert
-
