DiscussMormonism.com

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:

Mr. Faqs wrote:As most of you know, I was in the Marine Corps. I however did not serve a full term due to health reasons. Because of the nature of those reasons, and the situations resulting, I did not get an honorable discharge. I didn't do anything wrong, I simply had to leave, take a leave, and they wouldn't allow it. Thus, that resulted in not getting an honorable discharge. Not dishonorable, but not honorable either.

This is a lie. You aren't punished with a General, Less than Honorable, or Dishonorable discharge for health-related reasons... Psychiatric or otherwise.

- Doc

DrW wrote:Correct.

Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual wrote:Marines excused for medical or psychological issues that impair their ability to serve but would otherwise have performed honorably are also eligible for an honorable discharge.

Enough of the obfuscation and vague apologist style responses there, ldsfaqs.

If you haven't figured it out yet, those of us who have served in the Corps are proud of it and can get a bit annoyed with those who only claim to have done so with no basis in fact.

If you were in the USMC, you would have one of the documents listed below (filled out signed and dated as an official DD-214 form). And believe me, it is not a document that anyone who has served with honor would just forget about or misplace. It would help your rapidly crumbling credibility if you would indicate which you have.

- ______ Honorable Discharge

- ______General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions

- ______Other Than Honorable Discharge (OTH)

- ______Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD

- ______Dishonorable Discharge

I LOVE documentation!

I really do hope that ldsfaqs can explain himself on this point.

Was he really in the US Marine Corps?

Was he really an astronaut??

Did he write the US Constitution???

So much to discover, so much to admire!

I've already proved I was in the Marines on this forum.....
I don't need to prove it anymore so you people can get your jollies off.

I said I left for health reasons, which is entirely true, I didn't say "how" I left, which is what resulted in the particular discharge I got.
And as to the SAW compared with the M60E3, you clearly don't know what you're talking about, because they are almost the same exact design, just one is smaller. Only looking at one close-up would one see the minor differences between the two. Also, a Glock and Beretta look nothing alike no matter the distance, so you use a strawman example, but the SAW and M60E3 have many of the same design aspects. Again, like I said, the SAW was specifically designed to be a smaller/lighter replacement of the M60. So, guess what, that means they look and function nearly the same.

Anyway, it's not like I could see Rambo's gun up close, and it's been 20 years since I was a Marine. So, get over yourselves and your elitist arrogance.

ldsfaqs wrote:I've already proved I was in the Marines on this forum.....
I don't need to prove it anymore so you people can get your jollies off.

I said I left for health reasons, which is entirely true, I didn't say "how" I left, which is what resulted in the particular discharge I got.
And as to the SAW compared with the M60E3, you clearly don't know what you're talking about, because they are almost the same exact design, just one is smaller. Only looking at one close-up would one see the minor differences between the two. Also, a Glock and Beretta look nothing alike no matter the distance, so you use a strawman example, but the SAW and M60E3 have many of the same design aspects. Again, like I said, the SAW was specifically designed to be a smaller/lighter replacement of the M60. So, guess what, that means they look and function nearly the same.

Anyway, it's not like I could see Rambo's gun up close, and it's been 20 years since I was a Marine. So, get over yourselves and your elitist arrogance.

From what you have said, it sounds like you went AWOL.

ldsfaqs wrote:I've already proved I was in the Marines on this forum.....
I don't need to prove it anymore so you people can get your jollies off.

I said I left for health reasons, which is entirely true, I didn't say "how" I left, which is what resulted in the particular discharge I got. ...

Which discharge did you get?

If you were in the USMC, you would have one of the documents listed below (filled out signed and dated as an official DD-214 form). And believe me, it is not a document that anyone who has served with honor would just forget about or misplace. It would help your rapidly crumbling credibility if you would indicate which you have.

- ______ Honorable Discharge

- ______General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions

- ______Other Than Honorable Discharge (OTH)

- ______Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD

- ______Dishonorable Discharge

Your obviously brought up your alleged service in the US Marines in order to claim credit for it.

(And how did you 'prove' that claim, exactly?)

You have told us that you were discharged for 'health reasons'.

If you had had either of the first two discharges, you would clearly have said so. So which of the other three (non-honorable) discharges do you claim to have been given?

I agree that this sounds like going AWOL:

I however did not serve a full term due to health reasons. Because of the nature of those reasons, and the situations resulting, I did not get an honorable discharge. I didn't do anything wrong, I simply had to leave, take a leave, and they wouldn't allow it. Thus, that resulted in not getting an honorable discharge.

(my emphasis)

At best, OTH I'd say.

ldsfaqs wrote:And as to the SAW compared with the M60E3, you clearly don't know what you're talking about, because they are almost the same exact design, just one is smaller. Only looking at one close-up would one see the minor differences between the two.

Wrong--there are many visual dissimilarities between the M60 and the M249. I doubt you've ever seen either of these weapons in real life.

The M60:




The M249:

If I had went AWOL, that would mean I actually did something "wrong".
But I didn't. It's really quite simple, and nothing "negative" at all.

ldsfaqs wrote:I simply had to leave, take a leave, and they wouldn't allow it. ...

ldsfaqs wrote:If I had went AWOL, that would mean I actually did something "wrong".
But I didn't. It's really quite simple, and nothing "negative" at all.

An interesting problem in consistency there. Did you take that 'leave' they would not allow you to take? If so, how was that not AWOL?

Or did you just beg them to discharge you from the Marines? If so, what discharge did you get?

Simple question, for someone who takes the trouble to tell us he served as a US Marine, and really loves weapons-based chitchat. Fess up, man.

[Edited for two typos]

The Erotic Apologist wrote:

ldsfaqs wrote:And as to the SAW compared with the M60E3, you clearly don't know what you're talking about, because they are almost the same exact design, just one is smaller. Only looking at one close-up would one see the minor differences between the two.

Wrong--there are many visual dissimilarities between the M60 and the M249. I doubt you've ever seen either of these weapons in real life.

The M60:




The M249:

BUZZ Wrong.....!!!

That M249 SAW is a "customized" Modern Assault version, with shorter barrel, customized folding stock and near everything else.
It's not the base SAW design that the Military and otherwise has always used, which looks almost exactly like the M60, just smaller.

Anyway, I don't have to justify myself, I actually trained with the dang thing, and I can see the differences.

This is what a standard SAW actually looks like.
You will note the only obvious differences between the two guns is ones smaller, and it has a little fatter guard underneath the middle part where it's held.



Anyway, I've just demonstrated how ignorant you people are to not know you were using an image of a modern customized special forces version, trying to tell me that THAT was what a SAW looks like.

Ignorant people who have no experience with the Weapon trying to tell someone who does have experience what is the actual truth.
So, I caught you screwing up, showing that you DON'T "know better" than me.

ldsfaqs wrote:That M249 SAW is a "customized" Modern Assault version, with shorter barrel, customized folding stock and near everything else.

No, the M249 is not a "customized" version of the M60. On the contrary, they are two completely different systems in that:

*The M60 is a general purpose machine gun (GPMG), while the M249 is a light machine gun (LMG).

*The M60 is a product of the 1950s and was designed and manufactured in the Unites States, while the M249 is an adaptation of a foreign weapon (the basic design comes from Belgium).

*The M60 fires a high power cartridge (.303 Winchester) while the M249 fires an intermediate power cartridge (.223 Remington).

ldsfaqs wrote:It's not the base SAW design that the Military and otherwise has always used, which looks almost exactly like the M60, just smaller.

No--the M60 and the M249 look nothing alike. Put on your reading glasses and look at the pics in my last post, as it's obvious you've never laid eyes on either weapon.

ldsfaqs wrote:Anyway, I don't have to justify myself, I actually trained with the dang thing, and I can see the differences.

It makes Jesus cry when you tell lies, faqs.

ldsfaqs wrote:This is what a standard SAW actually looks like.
You will note the only obvious differences between the two guns is ones smaller, and it has a little fatter guard underneath the middle part where it's held.

No--they're entirely different; one comes from the USA, while the other comes from Belgium. They fire different cartridges. They employ different mechanisms with no interchangeable parts. Moreover, the M60 is about three decades older than the M249.

ldsfaqs wrote:This is what a standard SAW actually looks like.
You will note the only obvious differences between the two guns is ones smaller, and it has a little fatter guard underneath the middle part where it's held.

These are two pics of the SAME WEAPON, genius.

The problem when one lies in the presence of experts.......
I will hazard that if faqs ever was in the marine corp, he never made it out of basic training.