Six years used to be the longest enlistment contract(might still be they don’t try to recruit 50 year olds). For a first tour it would cover the old 6 year obligation they figured you to have. A shorter enlistment meant that at the end of 2 or 4 years you were placed in the inactive reserves for the remainder of the 6. It looks like he’s planning on getting out and is trying to get a job offer or two. I also expect it’s harder for a PAO type to stay out of the line of fire in Iraq.

Whoops - Sorry ’bout that

Back in my days in the military he would be in the slammer for disobeying orders

…until you can explain to me why he’s a coward despite serving in Afghanistan, I wish you’d stop smearing him unnecessarily…

Okay, point taken - although, note that I did “soften” it in the above to:

…a short-timer, conniving journaljismist (and possibly cowardly) sack of shit.

I am not certain (not having been there), but it would appear to me that, for a military “journalist” like Chiroux, duty in Afghanistan would not have carried anything like the personal risk involved in Iraq. It would appear to me that just being in a recognizably-U.S. uniform in Iraq puts one at risk for being shot at or blown up - and that he’s well aware of it. I admit to not having direct information - but, subject to better information, I don’t agree that Chiroux would have been at nearly the same level of risk (given his MOS) in Afghanistan.

Besides - Afghanistan appears to have been early in his service term. Back then, he was presumably younger, less experienced - and still thought he was basically invincible (a common belief among the 18 - 20 age group). Plus, he was likely somewhat less interested then in the opportunities to be found in declaring himself to be “morally opposed” to “supporting an illegal and unConstitutional occupation.”

Mark me down as an old curmudgeon, if you wish - I just think he’s trying to weasel out of a tour in the “hot zone,” and do it in a way that gets him lots of face-time with the MSM - likely leading to a solid job offer or two, post-service. I can’t say for sure - he might be Audie Murphy armed with a notebook. However, he comes across to me - based on what he’s quoted as saying, and the timing involved - as willing to sell out on his service contract in order to “cash in” in the civilian sector, and (not entirely incidentally) keep his tender journaljismist butt out of the possible line of fire.

To me, that’s as legitimate a viewpoint as: “…he just looks like a weasel.”

…if you can’t see any difference between “looks like a weasel” and “is a coward,” then I’d say the problem is with your analytical processes, not mine.

As I said, point taken - and, again, I will stipulate to “possibly cowardly”, as previously stated. For me, the jury’s still out - and likely to remain so - we’ll probably never know for sure.

I did not intend to impugn your analytical processes - I’m merely saying that my opinion of his level of valor (or rather, his lack thereof), based on the available evidence, may be different from your opinion of his personal integrity (or rather, his lack thereof), based upon the available evidence (including his appearance), but both opinions are legitimate.