Jump to content

Bush And Courage


Nuclear

Recommended Posts

President Bush went to Iraq this morning for Thanksgiving to eat with the troops. Democrats will call it irresponsible and stupid because they are jealous they didn't think of the idea and that someone like Clinton wouldn't have had the guits to do that. I think Bush has a lot ofc courage for doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah: courage from the man who hid behind his daddy's connections to secure a plum spot in the ANG to avoid serving his country in Vietnam, and who went AWOL even from that cushy post. A man who has the unmitigated gall to then drape himself in the trappings of a warrior while safe at home. Who will zip into Iraq and out again (and will, no doubt, be kept as far away from any potential danger as possible) for photo-ops and political points, even as soldiers and Iraqis continue to die. Courage from the chickenhawk administration? Puh-leeze.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Regarding your insinuation that Bush is a coward because he didn't serve in Vietnam that he had no moral right to send soldiers to Iraq...that comment reveals your anti-Bush bias as well as your ignorance of fact. Fyi, the majority of Congress today have not served in any war, not just Bush, and by a sound majority of 296-133, they voted to authorize Bush to declare war on Iraq. Btw, I believe there are only 4 sitting Congressmen who have served in war. So are these 4 people the only ones who have a right to vote on whether the US should declare war?

Does serving in a war define courage and those who don't are cowards? By implying this qualifier to the definition of courage, Chretien is a coward too. Let's see who else...there's Paul Martin and for sure,the majority of Quebecers with regards to WWII...I don't think I need to go on with a longer list of Left wing icons to make my point.

2. As for Bush going AWOL... get your facts straight for a change. National Guard service is defined by the total number of days served in the course of 6 years. Bush EARNED his honourable discharge because he put in the required number of days.

The Democrats were so sure that Bush fibbed about his Nat'l Guard honorable discharge, that the J.F.K.Jr. Guardsman magazine reviewed all the information and to the Democrats' dismay, the review confirmed that Bush earned his honorable discharge as 1st lieutenant. So sad for the Democrats.

Nat'l Guard Magazine: Bush served the required # of days to earn honorable discharge as 1st lieutenant

History indicates that presidents who were Guardsmen take an interest in citizen soldiers as commanders in chief, retired Col. Michael Doubler, a former National Guard Bureau historian, said. ...the expectation that presidents serve in the military before taking office is a mid-20th century phenomenon that began during the Cold War, when the nation maintained a large standing military, Doubler said. President Clinton was widely criticized for avoiding the draft during the Vietnam War. Bush also was accused of skirting the draft by joining the Texas Air Guard in 1968. He became an F-102 fighter pilot before being discharged as a first lieutenant in 1973.Doubler says it is unfair to criticize those who joined the Guard during the Vietnam War. "The government allowed it and in many ways encouraged it," he said "There were a lot of things the government did to authorize people to serve in places other than the front lines."
Bush's drill performance also stirred controversy during the campaign. Some reports charged that he was absent for a year. However, probably the most comprehensive media review of Bush's military records concluded that while he, "served irregularly after the spring of 1972 and got an expedited discharge, he did accumulate the days of service required for him for his ultimate honorable discharge." The review was done by Georgemag.com, the online version of the magazine founded by the late John F. Kennedy Jr. Guardsmen say Bush's service record is not unusual. "In any six-year time frame you probably can find some problems," says retired Rep. G.V. 'Sonny' Montgomery, D-Miss., founder of the House Guard and Reserve Caucus. "Just learning to fly the F-102 and not getting hurt and not hurting anybody is an accomplishment." Montgomery called Bush's election, "nothing but a plus for the Guard." The retired Mississippi National Guard major general supported Bush so strongly for president that he served as co-chair of the Veterans for Bush campaign, even though he is a Democrat. He said that the Guard will improve under Bush's leadership because he understands the life of Guardsmen and he's proud of his service.

3. As for plaintive wails about "all" the Iraqis dying now, strangely enough the Left never seemed to worry about the 300,000+ deaths that Uncle Saddam caused over the years. As long as Eason Jordan and his CNN news bureau pumped out happy images of Saddam's birthday party and Iraq having a 100% turn out at election time, all was hunkey dorey. Pass the beer and chips.

Eason Jordan confesses to CNN lying about Saddam's atrocities in the past

Link to comment
Share on other sites

President Bush went to Iraq this morning for Thanksgiving to eat with the troops. Democrats will call it irresponsible and stupid because they are jealous they didn't think of the idea and that someone like Clinton wouldn't have had the guits to do that.

The Dems will site it as an example of how President Bush is using the war for political purposes. Predictably, this is their modus operandi.

God Bless the troops on this Thanksgiving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bush is the first president to visit the front lines since Nixon went to Vietnam in 1969, according to Fox News via NealeNews.

Fox News story about Bush's visit to Baghdad

Also, even CNN reported[ begrudgingly, no doubt] on the happy reactions of the GI's to Bush's visit:

CNN reports on Bush's visit

The shocked and elated soldiers jumped to their feet, pumped their fists in the air, roared with delight, and grabbed their cameras to snap photographs. ..Afterward, Bush mingled with soldiers and temporarily joined the servers on the food line to dish out sweet potatoes and corn. "It gave us a little extra oomph," Spc. Talitha Williams, an Arkansas native assigned to the 1st Armored Division. "Maybe we can get through this." "It felt good," said Spc. Juan Deloera, also with the 1st Armored Division. "It really boosted my morale." "It helps a lot knowing that the commander in chief himself is going to come out here and make some of the same sacrifices away from his family, away from his home, to show that he is devoted and in the same position that we are," said Pvt. Patrick McFarland of the 1st Armored Division. "That's where your mind is, on home this time of the year, and you think about your loved ones, your friends and things like that, and then you have the leader of our country come here and share dinner with us. It's actually very special," said Sgt. Robert Dunn, a Dallas native with the 1st Armored Division.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does serving in a war define courage and those who don't are cowards?

No, but using a position of priviledge to avoid serving one's country , then leading the same nation to war and THEN crassly using the same soldiers who are dying as re-election props screams "coward"

Also, i find the right's willingness to shrug off Bush's cushy service while blowing gaskets over the service record of Clinton to be a telling sign of the hypocricy inherent on the right.

RAs for Bush going AWOL... get your facts straight for a change. National Guard service is defined by the total number of days served in the course of 6 years. Bush EARNED his honourable discharge because he put in the required number of days. QUOTE]

This isn't about his discharge: it's about the gaps in his service record.

The Straight Dope on Bush.

As for plaintive wails about "all" the Iraqis dying now, strangely enough the Left never seemed to worry about the 300,000+ deaths that Uncle Saddam caused over the years. As long as Eason Jordan and his CNN news bureau pumped out happy images of Saddam's birthday party and Iraq having a 100% turn out at election time, all was hunkey dorey. Pass the beer and chips.

Aren't you tired of whipping that straw man yet? Where were you and your vile ilk? No doubt shrugging Sadddam's heinous crimes off as necessary evils in the fight against communism or islamism or whatever other ism you use to justify the cynical realpolitik games played by your nation in the past and to this day. You, sir, are a hypocrite of the highest order.

The Dems will site it as an example of how President Bush is using the war for political purposes. Predictably, this is their modus operandi.

And they're right. Zoom in under a veil of secrecy, get your photo ops (those'll loook nice on the tube in the runup to next November) and get the hell out. That's Bush's M.O.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Black Dog,

1. What do you mean:

This isn't about his discharge: it's about the gaps in his service record.

The article you sited just goes over the same old, same old Democrat Party whining and wild accusations.

The National Guard magazine which you obviously did not read and which seems somewhat more "official" than the "Straight Dope" website you dug up from cyber netherlands explains how Bush's "gaps" of service were no different than others serving a SIX YEAR stint in the Guard.

Honorable discharge is based on total days served in the National Guard in the course of 6 years. Gaps are acceptable as long as a person made his superior officer aware of limitations in time and as long as total number of days in the course of six years were put in before discharge. Got it?

Bush had served his required number of days and asked for an expedited discharge from the Texas- based National Guard squadron so he could attend the Harvard MBA program in Massachusetts. If he's in Massachusetts and he has put in his required number of days of service, what's wrong with his asking for early discharge when his new address is over 1800 miles away from his college? You think it's so easy to get back and forth to Texas from Harvard while carrying an MBA program?

2. Quit blaming the right for criticizing Clinton for no reason. If Billy Jeff would keep his mutt face out of the camera like other former Presidents who have chosen to retire with dignity, Clinton would not present such a fat ugly target for comparison to the incumbent President. Clinton says "look at me, look at me" and critics just oblige his egotistical request. Even the Democrats want Clinton to fade into the woodwork.

3. Photo ops? Doesn't it cross your mind that what Bush did for the troops yesterday,while greatly appreciated by the GI's, was quite unsafe? Bush could have taken advantage of the traditional photo ops that Thanksgiving Day affords to an incumbent President.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but using a position of priviledge to avoid serving one's country , then leading the same nation to war and THEN crassly using the same soldiers who are dying as re-election props screams "coward"

UH OH. Leftie logic at work here.

If Canada tommorow is attacked by hordes of terrorists we will not be able to defend ourselves as Cretien is not even a Boy Scout much less an ex military leader. And yet he is able to send our troops to Afganistan and Bosnia? He is not a pole smoker yet he can influence homo laws? He is not an imigrant yet can influence immigration policy? He is not a dope smoker yet ..... hang on, strike that one, he must be.

Wow, you would be happier to have a military man in charge of America? Tell us, when is the next terrorist atack going to come so that America can strike all non ex military people off the leadership race card.

What an idiot you people are. Any tripe argument will do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

several news organizations are reporting it was bushs chief of staff andrew card who suggested it, that bush had to be convinced to do it, and that his main concern was about being forced to turn back.

its obviously a pathetic PR stunt. just like the aircraft carrier photo op that died a horrible death.

i just think its distastfull for anybody to profit of this, but especially the man who ordered the war. a real man would take the criticism but pass on teh glory. that is what leadership is.

sirriff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Riff, if you were the main man, you would televise your holiday greeting from a 'Bed In' from some hotel in NYC with Yoko Ono or what?

When you have troops and they do a job you go to them. That's leadership. An aircraft carrier and a victory tour of a country you have freed is a photo op, and a dam good one! The president visits with the troops that did the job, and in the back drop is the presence of America's military might. That is classic, a photo for a century book. Truely, America is great.

And if he sent a taped message, you would say he was too scared to show up but in lieu, it is a flagrent photo op. I I know it shoves a thorn up your behind but the troops loved it. It boosted moral and sent a message to Iraq that their cause is worthy and going well enough for the President to show up. It also sends a message to the foreign and ex Regieme fighters that America is not going anywhere.

You guys keep on trivialising yourselves through BS points. Should pick your battles more carefully..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you have troops and they do a job you go to them. That's leadership

uh no, you dont go to them if all you do is stay there for 2 hrs, bring along journalists to plaster it all over TV so you can try to pick up your poll numbers to get reelected.

leadership would be not lying about WMDs, ever hear about WMDs these days? apparently they knew exactly where they were, they knew they were these secret programs with yellowcake and alumimum tubes, they had defectors and secret labs and trailers and they had hundreds of specialists ready to go and find it. now? the WMD team has been mostly reassigned to the occupation, no bush official has mentioned WMD in months, bush is doing the photo op while he has actually INCREASED terrorism in the middle east and the US is now alienated from the world, something that is good for nobody.

thus lying about wars is not leadership, no matter how many pictures of bush serving turkey for 2 hours you see.

if he had patroled tikrit for a 12 hr shift and found some WMD THAT would leadership.

some people must have really hated clinton to pretend bush is anything but a little man.

sirriff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if he had patroled tikrit for a 12 hr shift and found some WMD THAT would leadership.

No Riff, that would have been called the duties of an NCO. A lower level leader. Hate to be the bearer of bad news to you Riff, Bush is the President of the United States. His duty is to show leadership to all of America, not dodge bullets and dig latrines. He showed leadership in ways well above the Senior Officer and General level by showing up there, even if only for a couple of hours. It was a tremendous boost for the troops morale. Like you would expect PM Cretien to wash pots if he showed up in Afganistan? Difuse mines and interrogate POWs?

As for the unwarrented sidetracking rant about WMD and all, it's a rant, period. I have responded to it in the other thread where at least it is in a more applicable catagory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir Riff said:

if he had patroled tikrit for a 12 hr shift and found some WMD THAT would leadership.

Yep, I realize Bush is a pale version of true leadership at the front lines of the battle on terrorism, the can-do type of leader who can nose out land mines, while riding in a chintzy Ilitis jeep, dressed in desert appropriate camouflage greens :

Chretien visits war torn and dusty Canadian Armed Forces base in Kabul in October .

Prime Minister Jean Chretien's motorcade will whip through the streets of Afghanistan's capital Saturday in an effort to thwart terrorists paid by warlords, the al-Qaida and the Taliban.

Chretien intervened on behalf of Al Qaeda leader of Afghan terrorist operation, CBS News, Oct.28/03.

Al-Kadr, who is on the U.S. government's list of most wanted al Qaeda leaders, ran the Afghan operations of Human Concern International, a Canadian charity. He was arrested in Pakistan in 1995 for financing the bombing of the Egyptian embassy in Islamabad by the Egyptian Al Jihad organization, but was released after Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien intervened with then-Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. Chretien later said he had not been fully briefed about al-Kadr's case before raising it.

Photos of Chretien at the front lines, when he's not working behind the scenes to help Al Qaeda terrorists get out of jail:

Chretien's quick visit to Camp Julien to play Foosball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uh no, you dont go to them if all you do is stay there for 2 hrs, bring along journalists to plaster it all over TV so you can try to pick up your poll numbers to get reelected.

Bush stayed for only 2 hours due to security reasons. Which means two things. The first one shows Bush's desperation. He knows that he's screwing up domestically, wasting money on useless programs. So he has decided to appeal to the troops. He knows he's screwing up the job in Iraq and like you said, his polls are going down. Which ties in to the second thing: Iraq is not secure. If Iraq was secure, Bush would have definitely stayed a bit longer. Unfortunately the security situation in Iraq is a load of crap right now and Bush, knowing it, wanted to get his ass out of there as soon as he could tell the entire nation of his surprise 2 hr party. Re-election? I highly doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one who has served in the American military questions why President Bush visited with the Troops on Thanksgiving Day. It was a gesture of respect and an expression of thanks to each and every serving member of our Armed Forces.

That the Commander-in-Chief left his family and home, spent his day on a plane to drop in to thank them and share their Thanksgiving, however briefly, conveyed a message to every one of them of the respect he holds for them and their service to their Country. If you don't 'get it' or think this was just politics as usual then nothing anyone could say will explain this to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did Bush visit Afghanistan for Thanksgiving? No.

Did he visit Afghanistan last year for Thanksgiving when the US wasn't yet occupying Iraq? No.

Afghanistan is just a stone's throw away from Iraq. Unlike being in Iraq, the US has a legitimate reason to be in Afghanistan and by neglecting his troops there, he has also turned his back on the victims and families of the victims of 9-11.

Some leader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Afghanistan is just a stone's throw away from Iraq. Unlike being in Iraq, the US has a legitimate reason to be in Afghanistan and by neglecting his troops there, he has also turned his back on the victims and families of the victims of 9-11.

I think you and I both know that's not a very fair criticism.

I believe that the fact that Bush took time to visit the troops on Thanksgiving was admirable and the sign of a leader, (though many presidents in the past had done the same)

On the contrary, not many presidents in the past have done the same. Richard Nixon was the last president to visit US troops in a war zone during Vietnam, and Bush was the first US president in history to ever visit Iraq, let alone during wartime.

Lets face it, Rove is a genius, and I'm not going to deny that the Bush team was cognisant of the poltical implications accociated with such a move. However, I find it difficult to believe that Bush's sigular or primary motive here was political. You just don't understand Bush the way fellow conservatives do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you and I both know that's not a very fair criticism.

Oh boo, hoo. Poor Bush is treated so unfairly.

You just don't understand Bush the way fellow conservatives do.

You're leaving this one wide open. I'll be kind. Here's a quote only conservatives would understand:

Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns, there are things we know we know," Rumsfeld said.

"We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talk about a lady that can inspire!

She tells the troop's that they are doing a great job but the American people are wondering why they are doing it.

Man! That would inspire me to wonder if she gets it.

LOL. She spends more time bashing Bush than anything else. And you say Bush had a questionable motive? I would've loved to have been a fly on the wall when she found out Bush beat her to the draw! Probably took away one of her big digs - "The President should be here" LOL.

She used this as an opportunity (you heard this from KK first, remember. only a theory mind you) to drop a trial balloon

She talks about how there is not enough troops to support two missions such as these. Watch the news in the next few weeks. You will probably hear stuff from 'annonomous sources' saying conscription is needed. Somebody errently posted that here as well. Anyhow, that's what that comment was designed to do. Pave the way for another anti Bush rumor.

CLINTON'S 'RALLY THE TROOPS' VISIT

Danial,

Can't believe you don't understand. It's actually pretty simple. I will use a traditional military example of strictly infantry formation, tactics and mnpower.

Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns, there are things we know we know," Rumsfeld said.

Ok so far. We could say that in an invasion of Iraq we know the Iraqi Military's overall troop strength as well as it's general deployment formations, locations and designations.

"We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. 

We may not know the deployment of all of these troops and their missions. Better believe that we are working on finding out.

But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

There may be troops engaged in activities that we are not aware of, locations we are not aware of and in amounts of manpower that we are not aware of.

The last is is very troublesome but one has to try to cover all bases and remain aware of the possibilities versus the realities. This is where resoning, logic, discounting bad int from good int and constant villigence of enemy actions are necessary. You cannot be allowed to be bogged down on the possibility that the Iraqi Air Force will drop elephants onto our troops, therefore we can discount that one and pay attention to others. Remember though, that it is possibile to do that (however unlikely) and not to be so focused on the possibilities that we pay no attention to things that are improbable.

Danial. you need a translation book for that? It's simple english that anybody with any ability at all can understand. It sounds strange but if you think, yes think man! You see it for the logical statement that it is. The only thing that I question is that given the basic logic that it expouses why didn't the idiots listening to this know this already?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you need a translation book for that?

A translation book for right-wing jargon and doublespeak is what I need. Of course you right-wingers understand the logic perfectly.

Here's one from your favourite governator I'm sure you have no problem with:

"I think that gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets not start posting dumb quotes from political leaders because, trust me, you'll lose. I could post a hundred examples from some of your freinds like Hillary, Ted Kennedy, and lets not leave out Willy.

In regards to the statement by Rumsfeld, what is there not to understand? There are things we know we know and there are things we know we don't know. If you don't register the simplicity of this statement then you have a deeper problem than a need for a translation book.

Besides, although you haven't given us the context in which the statement was made, I'm sure he was responding to some dipsh*t liberal reporter who asked a question like, "Does you're failure to have any sort of plan for the invasion and occupation of Iraq mean that you have put our brave fighting men and women at unneccesary risk?"

Oh boo, hoo. Poor Bush is treated so unfairly.

Oh, thats right, I remember now. Liberals have ultimate contempt for ideals like fairness, justice, and morality. It was foolish of me to assume otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...