Talk:David Petraeus/Comment by IP editor

__NONEWSECTIONLINK__

(moved here from top of pageAkradecki 05:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)) As a Vietnam veteran, I'd point out that somebody who is working for Petraeus' public relations must be editing this. It is simply an undeniable historical fact that Petraeus could easily have served in Vietnam in 1970. All he had to do is enlist. The Vietnam War was hot at that time; I was in Vietnam at that time. What Petraeus did was what a lot of service academy guys did -- wait out the war while getting an education at public expense. Once Vietnam was over, Petraeus pursued his career. When he finally did get into a combat zone, it was as a high-ranking officer in no danger. I don't have anything at all against Petraeus, but suggesting that he was somehow unable to serve in Vietnam is just silly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.145.131 (talk • contribs)
 * I'm the editor you're referring to, and I'm not on Petraeus' staff. I'm a Wikipedia editor who is a stickler for keeping articles on-policy. POV comments like you've been making have no place in an encyclopedia article. This is not a forum, a debate or a discussion. If Petraeus is criticized by reputable press for this, then report the criticism in a neutral way. Please see the note at the top of this page for the guidelines that apply to biographies of living persons, and please try to keep your additions in line with policy. As for this particular concern, please read the sentence carefully: it says, "He was commissioned an infantry officer upon graduation in 1974, too late to see combat in Vietnam." This is an accurate statement: hostilities had ended by '74. It makes no judgement about intent, one way or the other. The statement as it stands is completely neutral. To add comments that are intended to impune his character is to violate our policies and will be reverted. Thanks. Akradecki 05:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)