Army Veteran sues after being called to active duty

[Engineer]

Click me!

U.S. National - AP


Veteran Sues After He Receives Duty Order


HONOLULU - A veteran of the first Persian Gulf War (news - web sites) is suing the Army after it ordered him to report for duty 13 years after he was honorably discharged from active duty and eight years after he left the reserves.

Kauai resident David Miyasato received word of his reactivation in September, but says he believes he completed his eight-year obligation to the Army long ago.

"I was shocked," Miyasato said Friday. "I never expected to see something like that after being out of the service for 13 years."

His federal lawsuit, filed Friday in Honolulu, seeks a judgment declaring that he has fulfilled his military obligations.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Harry Yee said his office would defend the Army. He declined to comment further. An Army spokewoman at the Pentagon (news - web sites) declined to comment to the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.

Miyasato, 34, was scheduled to report to a military facility in South Carolina on Tuesday.

Within hours of filing the lawsuit, however, Miyasato received a faxed letter from the Army's Human Resources Command saying his "exemption from active duty had not been finalized at this time" and that he has been given an administrative delay for up to 30 days, said his attorney, Eric Seitz.

Miyasato, his wife, Estelle, and their 7-month-old daughter, Abigail, live in Lihue, where he opened an auto-tinting shop two years ago.


His lawsuit states that Miyasato is suing not because he opposes the war in Iraq (news - web sites), but because his business and family would suffer "serious and irreparable harm" if he is required to serve.


Miyasato enlisted in the Army in 1987 and served in Iraq and Kuwait during the first Persian Gulf War as a petroleum supply specialist and truck driver.


Miyasato said he received an honorable discharge from active duty in 1991, then served in the reserves until 1996 to fulfill his eight-year enlistment commitment.


The Army announced last year that it would involuntarily activate an estimated 5,600 soldiers to serve in Iraq, Afghanistan (news - web sites) and elsewhere. Army officials would be tapping members of the Individual Ready Reserve ? military members who have been discharged from the Army, Army Reserve or the Army National Guard, but still have contractual obligations to the military.


Miyasato said he never re-enlisted, signed up for any bonuses or was told that he had been transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve or any other Army Reserve unit.


"I fulfilled my contract," Miyasato said. "I just want to move on from this, and I'm optimistic that I'll be successful."


Miyasato speculated that he may have been picked because his skills as a truck driver and refueler are in demand in Iraq. He told reporters he did the same work as that done by a group of Army reservists who refused to deliver fuel along a dangerous route in Iraq last month.

I do have a question on this....if he did sign up for (with or without knowing) for the Individual Ready Reserves, how long after he left the military does the IRR contract stand?

 

[Infohawk]

And yet the chickenhawks on this board still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...


Edit: board, not thread.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Engineer

I do have a question on this....if he did sign up for (with or without knowing) for the Individual Ready Reserves, how long after he left the military does the IRR contract stand?

WTH?

I believe the rule is more or less just what the article says - anyone who joins on active-duty incurs a total commitment of 8 years, part of which can be served as IRR, where you're not normally required to report, but can be called up if needed. I don't know how they would have a lawful right to call this guy up 13 years after his 8-year commitment ended.

I thought it was interesting that this guy won his similar suit - I doubt the Army enjoys that kind of press.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

It's the truth.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

It's the truth.

Is it? Where are there any "chickenhawks" in this thread? Since none exist your post was not truthful.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: Engineer

I do have a question on this....if he did sign up for (with or without knowing) for the Individual Ready Reserves, how long after he left the military does the IRR contract stand?

WTH?

I believe the rule is more or less just what the article says - anyone who joins on active-duty incurs a total commitment of 8 years, part of which can be served as IRR, where you're not normally required to report, but can be called up if needed. I don't know how they would have a lawful right to call this guy up 13 years after his 8-year commitment ended.

I thought it was interesting that this guy won his similar suit - I doubt the Army enjoys that kind of press.

Yes, I surely do not understand how they can call him up after this amount of time. Are there any exceptions?

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

There weren't any ChickenHawks in the thread when he posted that so what were you talking about?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

It's the truth.

Is it? Where are there any "chickenhawks" in this thread? Since none exist your post was not truthful.

My bad. A typo. I meant board.

 

[Gen Stonewall]

I hope this is just a bureaucratic hiccup.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Engineer
Topic Title: Army Veteran sues after being called to active duty
Topic Summary: 13 years after honorable "active duty" dischage - 8 years since left reserves.

What, he isn't thrilled about the draft???

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

There weren't any ChickenHawks in the thread when he posted that so what were you talking about?

So you're saying Infohawk was calling Engineer a Chickenhawk? 🙂

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

It's the truth.

So, did you enlist after September 11?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Mill

Yes, I surely do not understand how they can call him up after this amount of time. Are there any exceptions?

I honestly don't know - I'm not really a personnelist (though I have learned a lot about personnel rules from working as a military defense attorney). It honestly sounds like BS to me. I guess we'll see. Hopefully it is just a paperwork SNAFU.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

It's the truth.

So, did you enlist after September 11?

What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq?

 

[Jhhnn]

Hey, it's one way to avoid a draft... make the military like the mafia- once you're in, it's for life...

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

It's the truth.

So, did you enlist after September 11?

What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq?

If you're going to insult a group of people for not enlisting to help a cause they support, I think it's valid to know whether or not you enlisted to help a cause you support.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Infohawk
And yet the chickenhawks on this thread still claim they are not needed in Iraq... I guess it's cool as long as someone else is doing the fighting for you...

Again with the insults.

There weren't any ChickenHawks in the thread when he posted that so what were you talking about?

Nice try, dahunan, but it is obvious he was trying to insult people. Here's a .

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
If you're going to insult a group of people for not enlisting to help a cause they support, I think it's valid to know whether or not you enlisted to help a cause you support.

I wasn't aware of their being a troop shortage after 9/11. More importantly I was not gung ho about it, I didn't berate anti-war protestors and call people that didn't support the operation panzies and stuff like that. But no, I didn't enlist. I dind't put my money where my mouth is because I didn't mouth off about it. Now there are a lot of mouthy chickenhaws on this thread and they should put their money where there mouth.

(Also It wouldn't make their non-performance acceptable, it would just mean I don't practice what I preach).

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Gen Stonewall
I hope this is just a bureaucratic hiccup.

Yeah, I hope so as well, but since this isn't the first time it has happened. I find this to be very disturbing. Once you finish you contract you should be done, right? Wait, isn't there an emergency clause they can use for a longer time period? It'd still be BS, and I'd like to hear them admit this is a emergency.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
If you're going to insult a group of people for not enlisting to help a cause they support, I think it's valid to know whether or not you enlisted to help a cause you support.

I wasn't aware of their being a troop shortage after 9/11. More importantly I was not gung ho about it, I didn't berate anti-war protestors and call people that didn't support the operation panzies and stuff like that. But no, I didn't enlist. I dind't put my money where my mouth is because I didn't mouth off about it. Now there are a lot of mouthy chickenhaws on this thread and they should put their money where there mouth.

(Also It wouldn't make their non-performance acceptable, it would just mean I don't practice what I preach).

Which "chickenhawks on this thread" are you referring to?

Is it me? or is it Mill?

 

[Luck JF]

I dont believe any Yahoo news. yahoo is too liberal.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
If you're going to insult a group of people for not enlisting to help a cause they support, I think it's valid to know whether or not you enlisted to help a cause you support.

I wasn't aware of their being a troop shortage after 9/11. More importantly I was not gung ho about it, I didn't berate anti-war protestors and call people that didn't support the operation panzies and stuff like that. But no, I didn't enlist. I dind't put my money where my mouth is because I didn't mouth off about it. Now there are a lot of mouthy chickenhaws on this board and they should put their money where there mouth.

(Also It wouldn't make their non-performance acceptable, it would just mean I don't practice what I preach).

Which "chickenhawks on this thread" are you referring to?

Is it me? or is it Mill?

Hehe. Sorry. That's the seond time I've made that typo. (if i meant thread I would have said "in"). I meant board. Weird. I meant board. Apologies.

Edit: jeebus the typos are bad tonight.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Luck JF
I dont believe any Yahoo news. yahoo is too liberal.

😕

Um...Ok. It's the AP whether that matters or not.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Luck JF
I dont believe any Yahoo news. yahoo is too liberal.

:roll:

That's a first...

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Luck JF
I dont believe any Yahoo news. yahoo is too liberal.

😕

Um...Ok. It's the AP whether that matters or not.

LOL - at this rate it's only a matter of time until Newsmax is considered too liberal, and the only reliable news source will be stormfront.org.