When Is Military Service An Issue?
- Thread starter nbcrusader
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
OP
OP
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
For purely political purposes, its as good as it can get
Angela Harlem
Jesus Online
nbcrusader said:
Sorry I wasn't clear. It seems to be quite an issue, simply by the fact it is discussed endlessly.
On the other hand, much like Clinton's lying and debauchery...so I guess it comes down to personal opinion on what is important and so on...
My non American opinion is there is something typically political about both these men. Perhaps compromises on honestly and character is something most politicians need to make. Not need, I guess, but are somewhat forced to because it is such a dirty game...
I dunno, I'm rambling.
The fundamental issue with this is that Kerry's military record is out in the public. Bush's public record is spotty at best.
Bush should have the balls to make his complete National Guard record public, then allow individual voters to formulate their own judgment.
The issue with Bush is that his name was skipped ahead of around 2,000 other volunteers so he could get to the top of the National Guard acceptance list. Not to mention he was trained to fly the aging F-102 which began retirement in 1970 from foreign service. So the chances of him ever being called to Vietnam was zilch.
One consistency with Clinton, he was honest about evading the draft. I believe what people chose to do during Vietnam is up to them, however they need to be honest about it.
Good article from The Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm
Bush should have the balls to make his complete National Guard record public, then allow individual voters to formulate their own judgment.
The issue with Bush is that his name was skipped ahead of around 2,000 other volunteers so he could get to the top of the National Guard acceptance list. Not to mention he was trained to fly the aging F-102 which began retirement in 1970 from foreign service. So the chances of him ever being called to Vietnam was zilch.
One consistency with Clinton, he was honest about evading the draft. I believe what people chose to do during Vietnam is up to them, however they need to be honest about it.
Good article from The Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm
Scarletwine
New Yorker
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20040212020309990001
"I don't remember seeing him. That does not mean he was not there," said Wayne Rambo, who was a first lieutenant with the 187th Supply Squadron at Dannelly Air National Guard Base at the time. The AP contacted more than a dozen former members of the unit on Wednesday, and none could recall ever running into Bush.
...
Meanwhile, a retired Texas National Guard officer said Wednesday he overheard a conversation in 1997 between then-Gov. Bush's chief of staff, Joe Allbaugh, and then-Adjutant Gen. Daniel James of the Texas Air National Guard in which he contends those two men spoke about getting rid of any military records that would ''embarrass the governor.''
Former Lt. Col. Bill Burkett told the AP that he saw documents from Bush's file discarded in a trash can a few days later at Camp Mabry in Austin, Texas. Burkett described them as performance and pay documents. He said the documents bore the header: ''Bush, George W. 1lt.'' - meaning first lieutenant.
...
I don't think talking about an issue is enough to drive moderates into Bush's arms. Especially if they have concern over deficits and the environment. If it does, oh well, he's aleinating the far right on his own.
edited to add
I don't think a National Guardsman would be allowed time off to campaign for a buddy during this time of war. "Oh by the way I can't go to Iraq, I need time off" Would it be so easy then?
"I don't remember seeing him. That does not mean he was not there," said Wayne Rambo, who was a first lieutenant with the 187th Supply Squadron at Dannelly Air National Guard Base at the time. The AP contacted more than a dozen former members of the unit on Wednesday, and none could recall ever running into Bush.
...
Meanwhile, a retired Texas National Guard officer said Wednesday he overheard a conversation in 1997 between then-Gov. Bush's chief of staff, Joe Allbaugh, and then-Adjutant Gen. Daniel James of the Texas Air National Guard in which he contends those two men spoke about getting rid of any military records that would ''embarrass the governor.''
Former Lt. Col. Bill Burkett told the AP that he saw documents from Bush's file discarded in a trash can a few days later at Camp Mabry in Austin, Texas. Burkett described them as performance and pay documents. He said the documents bore the header: ''Bush, George W. 1lt.'' - meaning first lieutenant.
...
I don't think talking about an issue is enough to drive moderates into Bush's arms. Especially if they have concern over deficits and the environment. If it does, oh well, he's aleinating the far right on his own.
edited to add
I don't think a National Guardsman would be allowed time off to campaign for a buddy during this time of war. "Oh by the way I can't go to Iraq, I need time off" Would it be so easy then?
Last edited:
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
About that picture...
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/02/11/wbr.kerry.image/index.html
An excerpt from the article
Wednesday, a Kerry campaign aide confirmed that Kerry was at the rally and he did speak.
But Kerry's aides stress that he and Jane Fonda were only acquaintances; the rally was nearly two-years before Fonda's contentious trip to North Vietnam; and, they say, Kerry did not support Fonda's trip.
Jane Fonda spoke for herself, telling CNN:
"My reaction is that the American people have had it with the big lie. Any attempt to link Kerry to me and make him look bad with that connection is completely false. We were at a rally for veterans at the same time. I spoke, Donald Sutherland spoke, John Kerry spoke at the end. I don't even think we shook hands. And they're also saying this organization, the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, was a Communist organization. This was an organization of men who risked their lives in Vietnam, who considered themselves totally patriotic. So anyone who slams that organization and slams Kerry for being part of it is doing an injustice to veterans. How can you impugn, how can you even suggest, that anyone like Kerry or any of these veterans were not patriotic? He was a hero there."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/02/11/wbr.kerry.image/index.html
An excerpt from the article
Wednesday, a Kerry campaign aide confirmed that Kerry was at the rally and he did speak.
But Kerry's aides stress that he and Jane Fonda were only acquaintances; the rally was nearly two-years before Fonda's contentious trip to North Vietnam; and, they say, Kerry did not support Fonda's trip.
Jane Fonda spoke for herself, telling CNN:
"My reaction is that the American people have had it with the big lie. Any attempt to link Kerry to me and make him look bad with that connection is completely false. We were at a rally for veterans at the same time. I spoke, Donald Sutherland spoke, John Kerry spoke at the end. I don't even think we shook hands. And they're also saying this organization, the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, was a Communist organization. This was an organization of men who risked their lives in Vietnam, who considered themselves totally patriotic. So anyone who slams that organization and slams Kerry for being part of it is doing an injustice to veterans. How can you impugn, how can you even suggest, that anyone like Kerry or any of these veterans were not patriotic? He was a hero there."
Scarletwine
New Yorker
Thanks for the update.
When I attended the Feb anit-war rally in Washington, there were several organizations that I didn't agree with , however the reason for the rally was more important than individual speeches.
When I attended the Feb anit-war rally in Washington, there were several organizations that I didn't agree with , however the reason for the rally was more important than individual speeches.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Scarletwine said:
Actually, again that is wrong. There were quite a few members of my unit during the 1st Gulf War that were alowed to not be activated. They requested that they not be activated for specific reasons, and the unit commander approved their orders.
A lot depends on your mission and at what point in the war things are occuring. The same commander had me arresting people who were AWOL.
But what do I know....I obviously have no knowledge of the reserves.
Goes to polish my medals.
Scarletwine
New Yorker
I wasn't implying you have no knowledge of the reserves. I haven't heard of any delayed or non-activations except in extreme cases, such as family illness or extreme hardship. That is a little different than my daddy's buddy needs a gopher.
I still believet there are more questions than answers.
And I have no knowledge of the military, being a third generation military brat.
I still believet there are more questions than answers.
And I have no knowledge of the military, being a third generation military brat.
Salome
you are what you is
I don't doubt you know more about the military than I know about my own bank account, but ...Dreadsox said:
this remains the most entertaining and interesting comment in this threadpaxetaurora said:As this President and his Attorney General have been so fond of saying, innocent people have nothing to hide.
Right?
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Dreadsox said:
and 20 years from now, you will remember your conrads and they will remember you.
lend some polish to Kerry
a felllow brother in arms.
I really don't care, but I do think it's ironic, and lame, that the democrats are making such a big deal out of Bush shirking out when the exalted and almighty Bill Clinton dodged the draft and did nothing. So they should drop it.
I must add, I don't blame anyone who did dodge the draft during the Viet Nam era. It was not a cause worth dying for, we shouldn't even have been there. But it reeks of hypocrisy when people who ran and supported a draft dodger are now suddenly trying to make it an issue that Bush didn't do enough. Yeah, they never brought it up when draft dodger Clinton ran against war hero George Bush Sr. Bringing up an issue only when it suits you at the time is so political it sucks
I must add, I don't blame anyone who did dodge the draft during the Viet Nam era. It was not a cause worth dying for, we shouldn't even have been there. But it reeks of hypocrisy when people who ran and supported a draft dodger are now suddenly trying to make it an issue that Bush didn't do enough. Yeah, they never brought it up when draft dodger Clinton ran against war hero George Bush Sr. Bringing up an issue only when it suits you at the time is so political it sucks
Last edited:
U2Kitten said:Yeah, they never brought it up when draft dodger Clinton ran against war hero George Bush Sr. Bringing up an issue only when it suits you at the time is so political it sucks
This is one of the best statements of the thread!
I have one problem with this whole thing......
When are the politicians going to learn, that the definition of "is" is a no win situation.
GW is basically doing the same thing his predicessor did on this level. If he had just come out and said.....I was absent from drills with permission, but made up the time to fulfill my service obligation, there would be NO issue. His handling of the situation has helped to make it an issue. Just saying I fulfilled my obligation=dodging the question by not being completely forthcoming.
All I have to say is that there were a lot of draft dodgers in the Vietnam War, and the fact that Dubya didn't want to end up in a body bag is certainly why he was in the National Guard. Let's get real: the National Guard, during that war, was a way for the children of the elite to escape death.
With that, military service shouldn't even be an issue. I certainly don't vote for a president on the basis of his "military experience," solely because the military isn't a one-man operation. The President, rightfully so, will ideally surround himself with capable military advisors. The only advantage of giving the President the title of "Commander-in-Chief" is to merge the leadership of the country and the leadership of the military into one post, hence being a good deterrent to military coups that plague many nations that separate the posts.
Basically, I won't vote for Bush, because I think that, not only have his decisions been poor, but that he surrounds himself with extremists, who aren't interested in the facts, but are only interested in advancing their predetermined agenda for the nation. "Facts" are assembled merely to try and bring credence to their predetermined solutions.
THAT is why I hope that Bush is kicked to the curb in this next election, not whether or not he was a war hero, which, clearly, he was not. This is just politics-as-usual, of which both political parties are equally guilty, and is probably vengeance for the vitriolic hatred that the GOP spewed at Clinton for downright petty and irrelevant actions.
Melon
With that, military service shouldn't even be an issue. I certainly don't vote for a president on the basis of his "military experience," solely because the military isn't a one-man operation. The President, rightfully so, will ideally surround himself with capable military advisors. The only advantage of giving the President the title of "Commander-in-Chief" is to merge the leadership of the country and the leadership of the military into one post, hence being a good deterrent to military coups that plague many nations that separate the posts.
Basically, I won't vote for Bush, because I think that, not only have his decisions been poor, but that he surrounds himself with extremists, who aren't interested in the facts, but are only interested in advancing their predetermined agenda for the nation. "Facts" are assembled merely to try and bring credence to their predetermined solutions.
THAT is why I hope that Bush is kicked to the curb in this next election, not whether or not he was a war hero, which, clearly, he was not. This is just politics-as-usual, of which both political parties are equally guilty, and is probably vengeance for the vitriolic hatred that the GOP spewed at Clinton for downright petty and irrelevant actions.
Melon
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
While I agree with Melon it shouldn't matter, I do think a straight answer would have eliminated this whole issue and that's what bothers me.
This man has gotten away with a lot of dodged questions.
This man has gotten away with a lot of dodged questions.
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
I liked some of Clinton's policies but not his character. That was always questionable. I agree with the people who are saying this wouldn't be an issue about Bush if he'd done a better job of answering questions. I don't give a damn that he was in the Guard or whatever, and I don't think most people do either. It's not determining my vote in any way.
Klaus
Refugee
It would be great if military service would be no issue and the iq of a future president would be more of an issue
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
Klaus said:
I agree. The intelligence of a candidate is much more important than his miltary service or lack thereof. Like I said I am not basing my vote on this.
OP
OP
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
But it is all part of character.
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
nbcrusader said:
True. We don't exactly want a sleazeball in the White House. By the same token we are voting for a President not the pope or a candidate for canonization or whatever.
Klaus
Refugee
nbcrusader: Just because you know that he went to Military Service dosnt tell you why he did this.
And of course its more honorable to save someone others life while doing military service than having an easy life at home.
But.. i think its also part of a good character to fight only for the wars you believe in and fight against the other wars, so doing no military service because there you cant decide which wars you fight isnt automatically a bad character.
I think its less important what you do, but how and why you do it
Klaus
And of course its more honorable to save someone others life while doing military service than having an easy life at home.
But.. i think its also part of a good character to fight only for the wars you believe in and fight against the other wars, so doing no military service because there you cant decide which wars you fight isnt automatically a bad character.
I think its less important what you do, but how and why you do it
Klaus
Seabird
War Child
I don't think it's bad character. Not everyone is cut out to be a soldier, and sending them to war is like killing them. My own brother dodged the draft, and my father was career army and he supported his desicion! I hold nothing against Clinton or Bush for trying to avoid going to war. But it is funny it's being made an issue by the democrats now, when they didn't care about it when Clinton ran against old man Bush. I can't believe people's memories are so short they can't see that and laugh at the double standard.
Last edited:
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
I think there is a slight difference though. Clinton may have dodged the draft, many did and it was considered a political move or a matter of principal.
But in Bush's case there wasn't complete honestly about where he was and when, yet he still wanted to paint himself as a man who served for his country.
Not that I'm saying what either of them did was right or wrong, but Bush tried to have it both ways and I think that's why it's become an issue.
Lilac
The Fly
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2004
- Messages
- 231
No, it's become an issue because his enemies have chosen to make it one. If he's as bad as everyone says he is, why did they even need to bring up something from30 years ago?
