Does anyone think it's strange to date the Guard back to 1636?  Might as well go back to England for a starting date - Massachusettes Bay Colony is no more the direct forefather of the US than England herself is.  It just seems silly to date a national institution to a time before the nation was even declared.  Let's set 1776 as a baseline, okay?

Is there anything so delicious as a "traditional military cake cutting ceremony?"

I just hope all those cake pieces have perfect 90 degree corners and straight edges. And the frosting better be so thick you can drop a quarter in it and NOT have it bounce.

I know after high school a few of my classmates joined the guard, part time under the old "One weekend a month, two weeks a year plan" to get work experience or learn a trade. When I was at my first grad school I served as a TA. It seemed like almost every undergrad (in reality, more like 10-20%) was in the Guard -- not ROTC, but enlisted in the Guard just to get by. With units being deployed and training schedules it would not be uncommon to hear of people having to take the same class 2 or 3 times before they would finally be able to get all the way through it without having to drop because of orders sending them somewhere.

However, now that the guard is being utilized more and more overseas what exactly separates it from the Army Reserve?  The only thing I can think of is that it is only outfit that can be utilized domestically in the event of a real crisis. It will be interesting to see what effects the continued overseas deployments of civic minded people who signed up to defend their community against floods, riots, and disasters has on their recruitment efforts in the future. I would not be surprised if enlistments in State Defense Forces surge in the years ahead as many of the types of people who feel the need to serve their home state do so without risk of extended deployments overseas.