Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Marine reunited with his K-9 corp dog (they surprised him)
5 views
Skip to first unread message
GLOBALIST
May 18, 2013, 12:08:02 PM5/18/13
to
http://tinyurl.com/bg8aqh7
He made the request, but often they destroy the dog,
because it was trained to work with only one master.
I think this dog may have been a explosives sniffing
dog, the German shepherds are trained to be aggressive
on command.
He made the request, but often they destroy the dog,
because it was trained to work with only one master.
I think this dog may have been a explosives sniffing
dog, the German shepherds are trained to be aggressive
on command.
Lawrence T. Akutagawa
May 18, 2013, 5:10:12 PM5/18/13
to
"GLOBALIST" wrote in message
news:e5d180c7-4a60-4479...@googlegroups.com...
***************************
[The asterisks separate my response from the foregoing]
One wonders what world "GLOBALIST" lives in. He takes a perfectly
wonderful story and by placing his own unique spin on it, utterly ruins it.
It would seem as though he really, really is incapable of understanding the
written English he himself presents to us. This post is just another
example of his abysmal English reading comprehension...to wit:
"GLOBALIST" says "...often they destroy the dog, because it was trained to
4, went on to serve in the Iowa State Fire Marshal's office."
Indeed,
http://www.army.mil/article/34905/adopt-a-veteran/
http://www.examiner.com/article/military-dogs-veteran-warriors-or-battleground-equipment
I invite "GLOBALIST" to find and present to us verifiable
links/references/citations that state that a military bomb sniffing dog at
the end of its service is often destroyed "because it was trained to work
with only one master."
"GLOBALIST" says "I think this dog may have been a explosives sniffing dog,
"...in the rugged terrain of Afghanistan's Helmand Province, sweeping roads
for bombs." There is no thinking needed if one understands those words in
the link. The link also establishes that this dog is no German Shepherd by
observing: "Casey, a Labrador retriever." And there is not one single
solitary word in the link about Casey being "trained to be aggressive on
command."
Now let us stand back and watch yet another splendid performance by
"GLOBALIST" crawling as quickly as he can back into his hole under that rock
of his.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjbTU5vWjXE
news:e5d180c7-4a60-4479...@googlegroups.com...
[The asterisks separate my response from the foregoing]
One wonders what world "GLOBALIST" lives in. He takes a perfectly
wonderful story and by placing his own unique spin on it, utterly ruins it.
It would seem as though he really, really is incapable of understanding the
written English he himself presents to us. This post is just another
example of his abysmal English reading comprehension...to wit:
"GLOBALIST" says "...often they destroy the dog, because it was trained to
work with only one master."
The link provided by "GLOBALIST" gives the lie to that statement: "Casey,
4, went on to serve in the Iowa State Fire Marshal's office."
Indeed,
http://www.army.mil/article/34905/adopt-a-veteran/
http://www.examiner.com/article/military-dogs-veteran-warriors-or-battleground-equipment
I invite "GLOBALIST" to find and present to us verifiable
links/references/citations that state that a military bomb sniffing dog at
the end of its service is often destroyed "because it was trained to work
with only one master."
"GLOBALIST" says "I think this dog may have been a explosives sniffing dog,
the German shepherds are trained to be aggressive
on command."
The link clearly says in black and white that Gundlach and Casey worked
on command."
"...in the rugged terrain of Afghanistan's Helmand Province, sweeping roads
for bombs." There is no thinking needed if one understands those words in
the link. The link also establishes that this dog is no German Shepherd by
observing: "Casey, a Labrador retriever." And there is not one single
solitary word in the link about Casey being "trained to be aggressive on
command."
Now let us stand back and watch yet another splendid performance by
"GLOBALIST" crawling as quickly as he can back into his hole under that rock
of his.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjbTU5vWjXE
GLOBALIST
May 18, 2013, 6:13:51 PM5/18/13
to
Times have changed but the numbers are still low in regards to adoption and paying for transportation. They can NOT fly in crates on military planes.
$1,000 to $2,000 out of your pocket to fly a dog on commercial airlines.
======================
After the Vietnam War, only 204 of an estimated 4,900 war dogs returned to the United States, according to military dog organizations. The others were euthanized, given to the South Vietnamese army or abandoned by soldiers trying to save the dogs.
(do the math...4,696 dogs did not make it back)
That changed in 2000 when President Bill Clinton signed a law allowing the dogs to be adopted. Dog lovers say the military has made dramatic strides since then. Last year, 338 dogs were adopted, including 34 that were given to police departments or other government agencies.
None are euthanized now, said Gerry Proctor, a spokesman for Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, where the military's dog adoption program is based.
"All the animals find a home," he said. "There's a six-month waiting list right now for people wanting to adopt. And (the applications) have gone up substantially since the raid."
The nonprofit Military Working Dog Adoptions has received over 300 inquiries in the past two weeks, said Debbie Kandoll of Las Cruces, N.M., who founded the organization after getting her first war dog in January 2008. Her group and Aiello's help raise awareness about the retired dogs, make sure they are treated well and help people through the process of adopting the animals.
Aiello said the most common breeds for military canines are Belgian Malinois, Dutch shepherd, German shepherd and Labrador retriever. They are generally older than 10 when they retire, and some have a litany of medical problems.
"They only have a couple of years left, so why not have them spend it with a loving family where they're not going to hear gunfire go off, explosives go off," Aiello said.
Not all the dogs could do well in a home with, say, children or other pets, but some are remarkably docile after spending years on the battlefield.
A dog named Chyba was deployed to Iraq before Madeleine Pickens, wife of billionaire T. Boone Pickens, adopted her last year. Pickens said Chyba is a sweet, relaxed dog who is happiest stretched out in the shade of a tree.
It's not cheap to adopt a military dog, in large part because adoptive owners often have to pay $1,000 to $2,000 to bring them back to the U.S. on commercial flights. Putting a retired dog in a crate on a military cargo flight is against the rules.
When dogs are adopted, they no longer belong to the military, "so it would be fraud, waste and abuse for the DOD to transport that pet," Maj. Gen. Mary Kay Hertog told the Air Force News Service in 2009.
Officially, military dogs are considered equipment, and retired dogs are excess or surplus equipment. Kandoll wants the military to reclassify the dogs as canine veterans. That would take an act of Congress, but it could also ensure that all dogs shipped out of the United States are brought back.
============================
I worked with USArmy dog handlers in Louisiana and Fairbanks, Alaska. They patroled at night. You damned well better notify them if you had reason to be on the site. The dogs were considered 'weapons'. One of the handlers got an emergency discharge, because his dad died and that left his mom alone on their farm. His dog had to be euthenized. I could watch them train during the day. The men wore straw stuffed padding on their arms and the dogs would tear them to shreds.
Right now there are no orders to return dogs to the states. That could change, but you figure how much hardware we abandon, there is no great
effort to save any of it.
In Alaska the dogs wore little leather booties to protect their feet from the
sharp ice. They claimed those dogs were a mixture of wolf and German shepherd.
They sure looked like it. Sometimes the owner would come in with their dogs
at their feet. I have always loved animals, but I never made one false move around them. They only acted on command and sometimes they trained them
in German. (sort of like a safety lock on a gun) No one else could give them commands in English, because the dog would be indifferent.
The rules may have changed but the numbers of dogs actual returning
are not that great. I know proving me wrong is your greatest joy, but
I am old school, were troops peeled potatoes, washed and waxed their
quarters, army cooks prepared meals, you did dishes. You stripped your
bed once a week and you picked up clean linen when you gave them your dirty ones. Halliburton now does all that for our troops.
Maybe the government can pay Halliburton several billion to ship
dogs back. You'd pay your part I know.
$1,000 to $2,000 out of your pocket to fly a dog on commercial airlines.
======================
After the Vietnam War, only 204 of an estimated 4,900 war dogs returned to the United States, according to military dog organizations. The others were euthanized, given to the South Vietnamese army or abandoned by soldiers trying to save the dogs.
(do the math...4,696 dogs did not make it back)
That changed in 2000 when President Bill Clinton signed a law allowing the dogs to be adopted. Dog lovers say the military has made dramatic strides since then. Last year, 338 dogs were adopted, including 34 that were given to police departments or other government agencies.
None are euthanized now, said Gerry Proctor, a spokesman for Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, where the military's dog adoption program is based.
"All the animals find a home," he said. "There's a six-month waiting list right now for people wanting to adopt. And (the applications) have gone up substantially since the raid."
The nonprofit Military Working Dog Adoptions has received over 300 inquiries in the past two weeks, said Debbie Kandoll of Las Cruces, N.M., who founded the organization after getting her first war dog in January 2008. Her group and Aiello's help raise awareness about the retired dogs, make sure they are treated well and help people through the process of adopting the animals.
Aiello said the most common breeds for military canines are Belgian Malinois, Dutch shepherd, German shepherd and Labrador retriever. They are generally older than 10 when they retire, and some have a litany of medical problems.
"They only have a couple of years left, so why not have them spend it with a loving family where they're not going to hear gunfire go off, explosives go off," Aiello said.
Not all the dogs could do well in a home with, say, children or other pets, but some are remarkably docile after spending years on the battlefield.
A dog named Chyba was deployed to Iraq before Madeleine Pickens, wife of billionaire T. Boone Pickens, adopted her last year. Pickens said Chyba is a sweet, relaxed dog who is happiest stretched out in the shade of a tree.
It's not cheap to adopt a military dog, in large part because adoptive owners often have to pay $1,000 to $2,000 to bring them back to the U.S. on commercial flights. Putting a retired dog in a crate on a military cargo flight is against the rules.
When dogs are adopted, they no longer belong to the military, "so it would be fraud, waste and abuse for the DOD to transport that pet," Maj. Gen. Mary Kay Hertog told the Air Force News Service in 2009.
Officially, military dogs are considered equipment, and retired dogs are excess or surplus equipment. Kandoll wants the military to reclassify the dogs as canine veterans. That would take an act of Congress, but it could also ensure that all dogs shipped out of the United States are brought back.
============================
I worked with USArmy dog handlers in Louisiana and Fairbanks, Alaska. They patroled at night. You damned well better notify them if you had reason to be on the site. The dogs were considered 'weapons'. One of the handlers got an emergency discharge, because his dad died and that left his mom alone on their farm. His dog had to be euthenized. I could watch them train during the day. The men wore straw stuffed padding on their arms and the dogs would tear them to shreds.
Right now there are no orders to return dogs to the states. That could change, but you figure how much hardware we abandon, there is no great
effort to save any of it.
In Alaska the dogs wore little leather booties to protect their feet from the
sharp ice. They claimed those dogs were a mixture of wolf and German shepherd.
They sure looked like it. Sometimes the owner would come in with their dogs
at their feet. I have always loved animals, but I never made one false move around them. They only acted on command and sometimes they trained them
in German. (sort of like a safety lock on a gun) No one else could give them commands in English, because the dog would be indifferent.
The rules may have changed but the numbers of dogs actual returning
are not that great. I know proving me wrong is your greatest joy, but
I am old school, were troops peeled potatoes, washed and waxed their
quarters, army cooks prepared meals, you did dishes. You stripped your
bed once a week and you picked up clean linen when you gave them your dirty ones. Halliburton now does all that for our troops.
Maybe the government can pay Halliburton several billion to ship
dogs back. You'd pay your part I know.
Lawrence T. Akutagawa
May 19, 2013, 12:33:50 PM5/19/13
to
"GLOBALIST" wrote in message
news:49307d82-92f9-4f12...@googlegroups.com...
The rules may have changed but the numbers of dogs actual returning
are not that great. I know proving me wrong is your greatest joy, but
I am old school, were troops peeled potatoes, washed and waxed their
quarters, army cooks prepared meals, you did dishes. You stripped your
bed once a week and you picked up clean linen when you gave them your dirty
ones. Halliburton now does all that for our troops.
Maybe the government can pay Halliburton several billion to ship
dogs back. You'd pay your part I know.
thread - which he initiated - was "...but often they destroy the dog,
because it was trained to work with only one master." After I pointed out
the linked article he himself provided belied his comment, he deigns to come
out of his hole under his rock to rebut not my comments, but <gasp> his own
original statement!
The problem, though, as is usual with "GLOBALIST" is that he does not give
any proper attribution to his rebuttal, which is full of deception and
disinformation. What deception and disinformation, you ask? Well,
"GLOBALIST" in his rebuttal has key two points - First, the number of MWD
(Military Working Dogs) actually adopted as per those put up for adoption is
"still low." Second, the adopter must pay for transporting the retired
MWD. Both of these points are completely wrong, as per the following
references/links/citations. "GLOBALIST" - as usual - given his penchant to
speak up without checking or researching, again establishes himself full of
balderdash and nonsense. Hopefully - hopefully - the reading comprehension
of "GLOBALIST" is good enough such that he can understand the following
references/links/citations.
Now let us AGAIN stand back and watch as "GLOBALIST" crawls as quickly as he
"General Hertog explained that contrary to popular belief, retired MWDs,
unless deemed by a veterinarian as seriously ill and suffering, or
unsuitable due to aggression are not typically euthanized following military
service. Since November 2000, only a few MWDs have been euthanized for lack
of a good home, while thousands have been placed in private homes, she
added."
from
http://www.dvidshub.net/news/106074/mine-maven-couch-companion-military-working-dogs-journey-retirement#.UZjxgrWdeuQ
dated 4/30/13
"Approximately 400 military working dogs are approved to leave service every
year, according to a Lackland AFB spokesperson. "
from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/05/military-working-dogs.html
dated 5/28/12
"So now, the dogs who have served and those who don't make it past the
aptitude tests are put up for adoption. The dog's personal handler gets the
first priority for adoption, but it then opens up to other military or
civilian adopters, she said.
" "The list of applicants is 18 months to two years' long, because that many
people want one of our dogs. It's wonderful," said McGee. Last year, about
430 dogs found new homes."
from http://awionline.org/content/canine-members-armed-forces-act
"On January 2, 2013, President Obama signed into law the National Defense
Authorization Act for FY2013 (H.R. 4310), which authorizes the Secretaries
of the various military services to transfer back to Lackland Air Force Base
or another location for adoption any Military Working Dog (MWD) who is to be
retired and for whom “no suitable adoption is available at the military
facility where the dog is located.” This language is needed to ensure that
the military returns MWDs to the U.S. so that prospective adopters do not
face that expense.
"...Rep. Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R-NC) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
introduced the Canine Members of the Armed Forces Act (H.R. 4103 and S.
2134). This legislation (1) Specified that MWDs are not to be considered as
"equipment" and reclassifies them as canine members of the armed forces; (2)
Authorized the Secretary of the appropriate military service to transport
any MWD back to the 341st Training Squadron or elsewhere for adoption...."
from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/2583 - Title 10 Section 2583
of the US Code
f) Transfer of Retired Military Working Dogs.— If the Secretary of the
military department concerned determines that a military working dog should
be retired, and no suitable adoption is available at the military facility
where the dog is located, the Secretary may transfer the dog—
(1) to the 341st Training Squadron; or
(2) to another location for adoption under this section.
news:49307d82-92f9-4f12...@googlegroups.com...
Times have changed but the numbers are still low in regards to adoption and
paying for transportation. They can NOT fly in crates on military planes.
$1,000 to $2,000 out of your pocket to fly a dog on commercial airlines.
/snip - follow the thread/
paying for transportation. They can NOT fly in crates on military planes.
$1,000 to $2,000 out of your pocket to fly a dog on commercial airlines.
The rules may have changed but the numbers of dogs actual returning
are not that great. I know proving me wrong is your greatest joy, but
I am old school, were troops peeled potatoes, washed and waxed their
quarters, army cooks prepared meals, you did dishes. You stripped your
bed once a week and you picked up clean linen when you gave them your dirty
ones. Halliburton now does all that for our troops.
Maybe the government can pay Halliburton several billion to ship
dogs back. You'd pay your part I know.
***************************
[The asterisks separate my response from the foregoing]
[chuckle] You just have to love "GLOBALIST." His original comment in this
[The asterisks separate my response from the foregoing]
thread - which he initiated - was "...but often they destroy the dog,
because it was trained to work with only one master." After I pointed out
the linked article he himself provided belied his comment, he deigns to come
out of his hole under his rock to rebut not my comments, but <gasp> his own
original statement!
The problem, though, as is usual with "GLOBALIST" is that he does not give
any proper attribution to his rebuttal, which is full of deception and
disinformation. What deception and disinformation, you ask? Well,
"GLOBALIST" in his rebuttal has key two points - First, the number of MWD
(Military Working Dogs) actually adopted as per those put up for adoption is
"still low." Second, the adopter must pay for transporting the retired
MWD. Both of these points are completely wrong, as per the following
references/links/citations. "GLOBALIST" - as usual - given his penchant to
speak up without checking or researching, again establishes himself full of
balderdash and nonsense. Hopefully - hopefully - the reading comprehension
of "GLOBALIST" is good enough such that he can understand the following
references/links/citations.
Now let us AGAIN stand back and watch as "GLOBALIST" crawls as quickly as he
can back into his hole under that rock of his.
from http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123165389 dated 8/28/09
"General Hertog explained that contrary to popular belief, retired MWDs,
unless deemed by a veterinarian as seriously ill and suffering, or
unsuitable due to aggression are not typically euthanized following military
service. Since November 2000, only a few MWDs have been euthanized for lack
of a good home, while thousands have been placed in private homes, she
added."
from
http://www.dvidshub.net/news/106074/mine-maven-couch-companion-military-working-dogs-journey-retirement#.UZjxgrWdeuQ
dated 4/30/13
"Approximately 400 military working dogs are approved to leave service every
year, according to a Lackland AFB spokesperson. "
from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/05/military-working-dogs.html
dated 5/28/12
"So now, the dogs who have served and those who don't make it past the
aptitude tests are put up for adoption. The dog's personal handler gets the
first priority for adoption, but it then opens up to other military or
civilian adopters, she said.
" "The list of applicants is 18 months to two years' long, because that many
people want one of our dogs. It's wonderful," said McGee. Last year, about
430 dogs found new homes."
from http://awionline.org/content/canine-members-armed-forces-act
"On January 2, 2013, President Obama signed into law the National Defense
Authorization Act for FY2013 (H.R. 4310), which authorizes the Secretaries
of the various military services to transfer back to Lackland Air Force Base
or another location for adoption any Military Working Dog (MWD) who is to be
retired and for whom “no suitable adoption is available at the military
facility where the dog is located.” This language is needed to ensure that
the military returns MWDs to the U.S. so that prospective adopters do not
face that expense.
"...Rep. Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R-NC) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
introduced the Canine Members of the Armed Forces Act (H.R. 4103 and S.
2134). This legislation (1) Specified that MWDs are not to be considered as
"equipment" and reclassifies them as canine members of the armed forces; (2)
Authorized the Secretary of the appropriate military service to transport
any MWD back to the 341st Training Squadron or elsewhere for adoption...."
from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/2583 - Title 10 Section 2583
of the US Code
f) Transfer of Retired Military Working Dogs.— If the Secretary of the
military department concerned determines that a military working dog should
be retired, and no suitable adoption is available at the military facility
where the dog is located, the Secretary may transfer the dog—
(1) to the 341st Training Squadron; or
(2) to another location for adoption under this section.
Lawrence T. Akutagawa
May 20, 2013, 10:48:20 AM5/20/13
to
"Lawrence T. Akutagawa" wrote in message news:knaum0$gb4$1...@dont-email.me...
********************
Has anyone seen "GLOBALIST" here in this thread after my response? No?
Well, then, he must be back in hole under that rock of his! This post by
"GLOBALIST" is yet another instance of him believing in what he wants to
believe instead of in the rock bottom, cold hard facts. Clearly he lives in
a world of his own there in his hole under his rock.
Has anyone seen "GLOBALIST" here in this thread after my response? No?
Well, then, he must be back in hole under that rock of his! This post by
"GLOBALIST" is yet another instance of him believing in what he wants to
believe instead of in the rock bottom, cold hard facts. Clearly he lives in
a world of his own there in his hole under his rock.
Lawrence T. Akutagawa
May 20, 2013, 11:08:59 AM5/20/13
to
"Lawrence T. Akutagawa" wrote in message news:kn8qg2$5do$1...@dont-email.me...
********************************
In my response to "GLOBALIST" above, I invited him "...to find and present
thing because he downright, flat out could not. His original statement is
just plain as wrong as can be and is a downright lie. This is yet another
instance of "GLOBALIST" talking about things as he wants them to be instead
of as they really, really are in our reality.
And instead of answering my response here, "GLOBALIST" instead responded to
his original post and <gasp> rebutted his original statement. That would
have been fine except that in his rebuttal, "GLOBALIST" presented even more
nonsense and disinformation.
Furthermore, when confronted with the bare, rock bottom truth - with
verifiable facts - "GLOBALIST" did what he always does when faced with the
truth...he crawls as quickly as he can back down into his hole under his
rock, where he is today.
In my response to "GLOBALIST" above, I invited him "...to find and present
to us verifiable links/references/citations that state that a military bomb
sniffing dog at the end of its service is often destroyed "because it was
trained to work with only one master." " Well, "GLOBALIST" did no such
sniffing dog at the end of its service is often destroyed "because it was
thing because he downright, flat out could not. His original statement is
just plain as wrong as can be and is a downright lie. This is yet another
instance of "GLOBALIST" talking about things as he wants them to be instead
of as they really, really are in our reality.
And instead of answering my response here, "GLOBALIST" instead responded to
his original post and <gasp> rebutted his original statement. That would
have been fine except that in his rebuttal, "GLOBALIST" presented even more
nonsense and disinformation.
Furthermore, when confronted with the bare, rock bottom truth - with
verifiable facts - "GLOBALIST" did what he always does when faced with the
truth...he crawls as quickly as he can back down into his hole under his
rock, where he is today.
Lawrence T. Akutagawa
Jun 10, 2013, 12:26:43 PM6/10/13
to
"Lawrence T. Akutagawa" wrote in message news:kndcs5$2iv$1...@dont-email.me...
*****************
It is so easy to show that "GLOBALIST" - as here in this thread - lives in a
world utterly divorced from the one in which we others live. Things in his
world happen that do not in our world. No wonder he rather sit in that hole
of his under his rock where it is nice and safe for him and where he can
imagine anything at all happening in HIS world.
It is so easy to show that "GLOBALIST" - as here in this thread - lives in a
world utterly divorced from the one in which we others live. Things in his
world happen that do not in our world. No wonder he rather sit in that hole
of his under his rock where it is nice and safe for him and where he can
imagine anything at all happening in HIS world.
Lawrence T. Akutagawa
Jun 10, 2013, 12:27:54 PM6/10/13
to
"Lawrence T. Akutagawa" wrote in message news:knde2r$9gd$1...@dont-email.me...
***************
And there sits "GLOBALIST" in his hole under his rock to this very day.
And there sits "GLOBALIST" in his hole under his rock to this very day.
Lawrence T. Akutagawa
Jul 6, 2013, 11:37:10 AM7/6/13
to
"Lawrence T. Akutagawa" wrote in message news:kp4uf5$7su$1...@dont-email.me...
*****************
And there to this very day sits "GLOBALIST" in his hole under his rock.
And there to this very day sits "GLOBALIST" in his hole under his rock.
Lawrence T. Akutagawa
Jul 6, 2013, 11:52:38 AM7/6/13
to
"Lawrence T. Akutagawa" wrote in message news:kp4uhc$883$1...@dont-email.me...
***************
The really interesting thing about this thread is that it - AGAIN - shows
how "GLOBALIST" quotes or presents information in a post, then contradicts
in that very same post items in that quoted information evident to anyone
who understands English. One wonders where "GLOBALIST" was educated.
Perhaps he was educated in the very hole that he today occupies, cut off
from the real world in which the rest of us live.
The really interesting thing about this thread is that it - AGAIN - shows
how "GLOBALIST" quotes or presents information in a post, then contradicts
in that very same post items in that quoted information evident to anyone
who understands English. One wonders where "GLOBALIST" was educated.
Perhaps he was educated in the very hole that he today occupies, cut off
from the real world in which the rest of us live.
0 new messages