Wearing you beret from NBB outside of NBB?

[lordmonar]

It's funny how many cadets go to this activity just so they can wear the beret.

So?
Look at it from a mission point of view.

The mission is to get the airshow done.  CAP needs XXX number of cadets and seniiors to get said mission done.

Offer them a beret for life and they will pay $200+air fair and give up two weeks of their time for the privilage of working their butts off.

I think that it is and OUTSTANDING incentive.

With all the bling hates out there.......no one seems to look at the REASON why we use bling when we us it.
The BSA has this locked down.    You want someone to go to training, and do this or that thing.....they just make a "knot" for it and send it out to the field.  Those guys who are knot hunters then do all the requirments, get their knot, buy the patch and sew it on their uniform.  The BSA wins....and it only cost them the upfront cost of getting the knots patches made.

If you think this is wrong.....then you need to be going after all those people who joined the military for the education benifits and you need to go after the Army for all the bling they have on their dress uniforms.

[lordmonar]

I guess we will have to disagree than.

I feel the French took the easy way out in the war. I want no part of a government, that when faced with the complete domination of there way of life, simply puts up the white flag. Nor do I believe anyone should accept the French governments surrender and compliance in the Nazi program as ok in any way.[/qutoe]Except that you forget that France got majorly destroyed in the first world war.  Almost all of the fighting was done on french soil.  France lost almost 1.7milliion dead and 4.2 million wounded....from a population of only 39.6 million people.  They had the highest percentage of poluation dead of the western countires (Romania and Serbia got majorly reamed).  Their economy was devistated their cities destroyed...they were not in the mood to do that again.

Winston Churchill faced the same options as the French did. Surrender and save a few thousand battlefield lives, or fight on and save tens of thousands from the Nazi slaughter in the death camps and roving death squads.

I have to disagree that the options were the same.....In 1940 there were not any German Troops outside london....nor had Britian taken the brunt as france did in the first world war.

Churchill's speech of 28 May 1940 said "I have only to add that nothing which may happen in this battle can in any way relieve us of our duty to defend the world cause to which we have vowed ourselves"

Churchill's ever famous speech on 4 June 1940 to the House of Commons laid out the simple plan that surrender CAN NEVER be an option to tyrants.

Churchill said "Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."

This is the attitude that needs to be propagated to our young people, the next generation that will have no first hand knowledge of the war. This generation in the schools now will never remember speaking to a ww2 vet. They will hear no firsthand stories. So it is imperative that we condone the French surrender as the easy way out, and make Great Britains defiance a shining example of what must be done when liberty and freedom are threatened by pure evil.

While ignoring the fact that the U.S. hemmed and hawed...and allowed the whole thing to happen in the first place by not being a leader in 1919 and making the World League work.  I agree.  I disagree that we need to condemn France for taking the "easy" way out.  It was not easy and it certainly saved french lives and preseved their cities, industry. etc.