Talk:Paul Yingling

message: Paul Yingling is not a war protestor or anti-war activist. Please do your research on this matter, whoever keeps linking him to those who hold those positions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Paganolive (talk • contribs) 02:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Utter nonsense. You are trying to categorize people into "anti" and "pro" war in order to corral him into your camp, next to a deserter and others calling for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. His views are much more complex than simply "pro" and "anti" war. He does not disagree with the current policy, he in fact argues that we should have adopted Petreaus' strategy sooner, and chastizes the leadership for not recognizing earlier the nature of the insurgency we are in. Professional journals like AFN are regularly vehicles for lateral communication and debate about current issues. That does not make every dissenter "anti-war" for having different idea.s --Mmx1 12:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yingling's Political Position on the Iraq War 

message: -The chain of command is not bizzare, it is an institution of the military by using your chain of command to seek redress. A person in the military to follow protocol by the laws of the military. It is called Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
-Your statement that LTC Yingling is trying to reform the military with his ideas is mis-informed he was on the planning with an U.S. unit during the war.
Yingling was a division planner with 2nd Infantry Division prior to his deployment to OIF I as a battalion executive officer. In OIF I, his unit was tasked with collecting enemy ammunition and training the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps. On his second deployment to Iraq, as the effects coordinator, he was responsible for information operations, public affairs, psychological operations, civil affairs, and Iraqi Security Forces development.
-All of a sudden a division planner as LTC Yingling is blaming now the Generals? He was in the position to use his chain of command. 
-LTC Yingling falls into the same category as Colonel Ann Wright, Lieutenant General William Eldridge Odom and First Lieutenant Ehren Watada of using the public forum to make statements against their military chain of command and is accoutable for all his actions by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).Bnguyen 09:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Refer to Mmx1

message: 933. ART. 133. CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN
Any commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
934. ART. 134. GENERAL ARTICLE
Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court. 
Bnguyen 13:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the folks here are very familiar with the UC MJ, afterall most of them live under its rules. I don't want to be rude but it doesn't really matter if you think that Yingling violated the UCMJ. At all. Unless you can reference a reliable source that claims or speculates that he has commited a violation or a reliable source that has classified him as anti-war then it is just your opinion. Yoe are of course you're entitled toyour opinion, you're just not entitled to put your opinion into an article per original research. Please stop beating this dead horse. NeoFreak 05:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible UCMJ violation by LTC Paul Yingling

message: Your basing the decision not to delete this BLP on the number of Google hits?  How absurd.  My website has gotten 2000 hits this month alone and it's incredibly specialized to a small target audience!
Please look at the arguments for notability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability/Arguments and look at this without the rose colored glasses.
Put yourself in my shoes for a moment - I'm about to publish a book unrelated to this, but this is bad press.  Should I have a BLP on wiki about me?  NO!  I've done as much as this fella, but am not conceited enough to think that it warrants attention.  In the large scope of things this guys actions are only significant to a limited few and will be limited in duration of time.
Therefore, because of the short term interest in the information, it really would not have merit when compared to the guidelines of notability.
-PY  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.104.219 (talk) 17:39, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I was using the number of Google hits as an explanation of one of my many reasons to end a prod deletion, if you really want to delete it try sending it to AfD for a full debate.  I am aware that having hits on google is not reason enough to keep an article, but it is surely enough reason for me to remove a prod.  Aside from that Yingling is quite notable, has been discussed repeatedly in articles on the stategy of the war in Iraq, and  will certainly be a part of any historical analysis of what happened in this war both in US military and US political history.  As to my need for a reaon to remove a PROD, Wiki policy is pretty vague on how shallow my justification need be.   If you feel so strongly nominate for AfD.  Moheroy (talk) 19:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

text: How about this a a reasonable alternative, let's include Yingling's middle name in this BLP to eliminate ambiguity.  Would that be fair?  -PY—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.104.219 (talk) 20:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google hits ?!? 

message: LTC Yingling, whom I know personally, is an intelligent, thoughtful man.  His words count because he is who he is.  A standout among his peers, who has taken setbacks due to his chosen path, LTC Yingling chose to do something which will probably not benefit himself.  Though I may not completely agree with what LTC Yingling wrote, he posed his thoughts in a journal which would make the Army think about what it has done and where it is going.  A father, a husband, a career officer, a volunteer coach, and everything else he is, he wrote what he thought, at his own risk.  Not for grandeur, but just because he thought it.  When a professional organization can't look upon what it is with a critical eye, it may no longer be able to make itself relevant.  Is he guilty of actions unbecoming?  IMO. absolutely not.  He has staged a suggestion ready for comment for an organization that prides itself on its ability to learn and change.  If an up-and-coming leader cannot do such things, then our taxpayers should be leary.  Otherwise, read what he said, determine what it means, and make an informed, educated jab at what needs to happen next.
LTC Bill Allen  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billallen65 (talk • contribs) 08:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  He's an Officer, He Cares, So he Speaks!