So are we Airmen?

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I'm not anti-CAP, and I don't think that RADIOMAN is either.

I don't know where you're coming from on the topic, but instead of trying to say that RM is "anti-CAP," my own assessment is that he is not "anti-CAP" but instead is as myopic about his POV of what CAP should be in his eyes as he accuses so-called "wannabes" of being.  He seems to look at CAP solely from the POV of a PAO, who tailors his PAO work to de-emphasise any connection CAP has with the Air Force, uniforms, ranks, etc. in favour of a flying version of the American Red Cross.

I've stated in other threads that I think many of our members are in CAP for the wrong reason, and many of the topics we have here represent that. 

What "wrong reasons" would those be?  If taking pride in our connection to the Air Force is a "wrong" reason, then I know a heck of a lot of people, myself included, would proudly plead nolo contendre to such a charge.  It is not the reason, but it is a reason.  I am not going to be shamed into the category of "wannabe" for that, nor will I permit being thought of as any less or any greater of a CAP member because I prefer the AF-type uniform over the G/W and polo shirts.  I have encountered CAP members who take just as much of a high-nosed attitude because they don't wear the AF uniform ("we're not posers!") as I have those who do wear the AF uniform.  Both attitudes suck.

A lot of the discussions often revolve around what CAP is giving to its members, instead of what our members are giving to CAP, or could be giving to CAP.

I think you're approaching that from the wrong angle.  A lot of this goes back to Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs.

Ever since my Level I back in 1993, it has been emphasised to me by CAP officers much smarter than I am with much more service than I have that our "payment" comes from such things as rank, ribbons and awards, as well as wear of the AF uniform.

I don't need to tell you or anyone else that a heck of a lot of us give as much to CAP in terms of time, talent and treasure as we often do to our professional lives.  Our Deputy Commander for Seniors spends so much time at the Squadron facility and doing things at Wing that she's regarded almost as a "fixture," in a good way.

When I hear people expressing negativity about something CAP (or the Air Force) has done to us, whether it be the AUX ON/AUX OFF status, berry boards, the title of "Airman," using the colour-that-isn't-a-colour of grey as a catch-all uniform "solution," the utter and complete bungling of taking away the CSU, the AF refusing to teach its people even the basics about us, etc. the feeling I usually have and pick up from others is yet another "thank you sir may I have another?" we have to take for the actions of a few (or even one) bad actor.

"I'll quit if we aren't the AF Aux anymore". 

Unapologetically guilty.  If we ever get removed entirely from the AF, yes, I will and I know a lot of others who will too.  It may be a moot point because the chances are very likely that CAP will cease to exist if cut off from the AF.

It's all very selfish, which is directly opposite to our core value of Volunteer Service.

You can say so, but when the organisation you're giving your volunteer service to, or its parent service, slaps you round the earhole one too many times for things you had no part in...CAP isn't the only game in town as per a military auxiliary-type volunteer organisation.  The CGAUX (which I've served in), NSCC or U.S. Army Cadet Corps get treated much better and aren't always under the microscope over the colour of their uniforms the way we seem to be.

I think that RADIOMAN is largely in favor of what our missions are and how we do them.  You can be a hugely successful PAO writing about our successful missions and the great things we do.  However, all the advantages of those good press releases and news coverage go away when our members allow their egos to get in the way, and we become an organization of people who "wish we were in the Air Force."

The converse can easily be said about those who loudly downplay our Air Force connections and say (in defiance of regs) "The only uniform I have is the polo shirt and grey slacks, and that's all I'm getting!"  There is just as much "ego" in that as in the supposed "wannabes".

I don't necessarily agree with everything you write RADIOMAN, but I can certainly see your overwhelming theme in your posts.  Our members should focus on doing our missions and be proud of our association, however, we should still keep the perspective that we are a civilian auxiliary, not a reserve component.

I would agree with that statement, except for a few caveats:

RM's focus too often comes across as chiding us for actually liking our connection to the Air Force.  Being proud of our AF connection and being mission-ready are not mutually exclusive.  His repetition of "we are the CIVIL Air Patrol" is not needed.

I have never met anyone in 18 years of CAP service who has believed that we are anything but an auxiliary component, except for a couple of cadets who think they can be Gunny Hartman.  I personally have taken the time on many occasions to explain to someone who has seen me in uniform and is unfamiliar with CAP that, no, I am not active Air Force, Air National Guard or Air Force Reserve and then explain what CAP is.  I can usually do so in under one minute.

And I see the title of "airman" in its most general sense as definitely applying to us...remember, we've also been called "flying minute men."



http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/usaf/cap.htm

[Short Field]

I was a Airman 24/7 for 28 years.  I take offense at people who think joining CAP by paying less than a hundred bucks a year equals that service and entitles them to be called Airman.  Have a bunch of civilians and non-USMC military vets start calling themselves Marines and see what the real Marines think about it.   

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I was a Airman 24/7 for 28 years.  I take offense at people who think joining CAP by paying less than a hundred bucks a year equals that service and entitles them to be called Airman.  Have a bunch of civilians and non-USMC military vets start calling themselves Marines and see what the real Marines think about it.   

"Airman" is a much more general term than "Marine" is.  I just did a Google search on the term and a very small percentage related to the USAF rank.

Do you take offence at NOTAM's?

I don't think anyone has said service in CAP equals your 28 years of active duty...I certainly don't believe that way.

[Short Field]

I was a Airman 24/7 for 28 years.  I take offense at people who think joining CAP by paying less than a hundred bucks a year equals that service and entitles them to be called Airman.  Have a bunch of civilians and non-USMC military vets start calling themselves Marines and see what the real Marines think about it.   

"Airman" is a much more general term than "Marine" is.  I just did a Google search on the term and a very small percentage related to the USAF rank.

Do you take offence at NOTAM's?

I don't think anyone has said service in CAP equals your 28 years of active duty...I certainly don't believe that way.

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen Norton A. Schwartz was not referring to the generic "airmen" you refer to that are involved in flying airplanes but to the "Airmen" that make up the military force that is the USAF.  CAP is NOT part of that honored force of war-fighters who have committed their lives and futures to the defense of our country.  Being an Airman is a title of honor and respect earned by service.  That is why members of the USAF, from four-star Generals to slick-sleeve Airmen Basics, take pride in being called "Airmen".   

Why would I take offense at NOTAM's - that is just plain silly and an absolute grasping of straws to justify using a title of respect you have not earned.   Would a Marine take offense at the NWS Marine Forecasts or the NTSB Marine Accident Reports?

[a2capt]

..or likewise, being just south of a rather large US Marine Corps base, and 3/4 mile from the coast, I can't say "the marine layer" with out there usually being some crack reply about the large contingency of Marines to the north..

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen Norton A. Schwartz was not referring to the generic "airmen" you refer to that are involved in flying airplanes but to the "Airmen" that make up the military force that is the USAF.  CAP is NOT part of that honored force of war-fighters who have committed their lives and futures to the defense of our country.  Being an Airman is a title of honor and respect earned by service.  That is why members of the USAF, from four-star Generals to slick-sleeve Airmen Basics, take pride in being called "Airmen".   

First of all, I don't do pissing contests, especially not on the issue of semantics.

Second of all, thank you for your 28 years of service.

And third, I was once one of those airmen (ANG) under your definition and how you interpret Gen Schwartz' statement.  Back when I went to lovely Lackland, you got called "Airman" from day one.  Now it's "Trainee."  I think that's a good thing.  I had to get out early because of medical issues, and CAP to me is my way of continuing my service in support to the Air Force.

If CAP is not part of the tradition of the honoured force of war-fighters, especially given that we presaged an independent AF by six years...then I don't know what we are, honestly, especially given that the GS side of Air Force civilians (which is where I include us as "airmen," and without asking Gen Schwartz himself I don't know where he stands on it) seem to be included in the definition, though they may never wear a uniform or risk their lives in battle (ART's and AGR's aside).

It could be that we really are the AF's red-haired stepchild that has no business connecting with the AF's traditions.  I don't know.  CAP's entire identity seems to be getting more and more schizoid.

In any case, this is my last word on the subject.

[PHall]

Short Field, according to the first post of this thread, even Department of the Air Force Civilian Employees are included.
Many if them have never served. So is it wrong for them to be referred to as Airmen too?
If it is then you better contact General Swartz and tell him his Policy Decision (AFPD 1) is wrong and that he needs to fix that right now.

[Short Field]

Well, PHall, when I deployed my teams to the sandbox and other hotspots around the world, the AF Civilian Employees went as well.  If you have a problem with General Swartz's policy, you call him.  I don't have a problem with it.  But he didn't include CAP in his definition.

CyBorg - do you seriously believe because CAP started out in wartime and actually performed combat missions, you are now a member of the honored force of war-fighters and entitled to be called Airman?  Your service in the USAF and graduation from Basic Training gives you the right to be called Airman.  Writing a check to join CAP doesn't make you a Department of the Air Force Civilian with a GS rating. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Why would I take offense at NOTAM's - that is just plain silly and an absolute grasping of straws to justify using a title of respect you have not earned.   Would a Marine take offense at the NWS Marine Forecasts or the NTSB Marine Accident Reports?

NOTAMS are notices to airmen, plural noun. Marine forecasts use the word Marine as an adjective that describe the forecasts are for a marine environment. Historically, aviators have also been called airmen; that you have an issue with CAP members identifying themselves closer to the Air Force family is duly noted, but I do believe that we could call ourselves Volunteer Airmen should be no issue.

[PHall]

Well, PHall, when I deployed my teams to the sandbox and other hotspots around the world, the AF Civilian Employees went as well.  If you have a problem with General Swartz's policy, you call him.  I don't have a problem with it.  But he didn't include CAP in his definition.

I have no problem with it at all. They've been preaching the "One Team, One Fight" thing for decades. So including Civilian Employees is nothing new.
But some people have posted above that if you haven't completed Basic Training then you haven't "earned" the title of "Airman".
I just pointed out that there are a number of players on the team who have not completed Basic Training and thus, according to these posts, have not earned the title of Airmen and shouldn't be addressed as such.

Oh and Short Field, I was one of the crew dogs who flew you and your teams to many of those garden spots. So please dump the 'tude. It's unbecoming.

[Short Field]

And I have said nothing about you not being called an Airman.   

    I am an American Airman.
    I am a Warrior.
    I have answered my Nation's call.

    I am an American Airman.
    My mission is to Fly, Fight, and Win.
    I am faithful to a Proud Heritage,
    A Tradition of Honor,
    And a Legacy of Valor.

    I am an American Airman.
    Guardian of Freedom and Justice,
    My Nation's Sword and Shield,
    Its Sentry and Avenger.
    I defend my Country with my Life.

    I am an American Airman.
    Wingman, Leader, Warrior.
    I will never leave an Airman behind,
    I will never falter,
    And I will not fail.

[Ed Bos]

^ The Airman's Creed, a proud tradition... since 2007