The W
Views: 100063230
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
25.10.14 2257
The W - Current Events & Politics - Wartime records
This thread has 24 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(2457 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (34 total)
Gavintzu
Summer sausage








Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary ... Alberta Canada

Since last post: 2869 days
Last activity: 2869 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Does it matter that most of the U.S. leadership who are in favour of war with Iraq haven't served their country in an actual war? This column by Eric Margolis brings up a controversial point ... most of the senior White House movers and shakers haven't been in uniform and yet they are willing to send young Americans to die in a "pre-emtive" strike halfway around the world.

---------------------------------------------------------
"Let's see what all those Republican "chickenhawks" clamouring for war against Iraq did during America's last major conflict, Vietnam (with thanks to the muckraking New Hampshire Gazette).

President George Bush - a cushy slot near home engineeredby dad in the Texas Air National Guard; apparently went AWOL for an entire year; service records never revealed.

Vice President Dick Cheney - no military service.

Chief Pentagon hawks Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz - no military service.

Grand Inquisitor John Ashcroft - no military service.

Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott, no military service.

Media neo-cons baying for war against Iraq: William Kristol, Michael Ledeen, Bill O'Reilly, Charles Krauthammer, George Will, Ken Adelman, Chris Matthews, and Rush Limbaugh - no military service during Vietnam.

These men are all around my age. During that time, I enlisted in the U.S. Army. Where were they when so many men were going into battle and to their deaths?"
------------------------------------------------------------

This is not intended on my part as a simple jab at the Republican leadership. On one hand, FDR didn't serve in the military and he was a tremendous leader during the Depression and WWII ... his lack of military service didn't affect the confidence Americans should have and did have in his decisions.

On the other hand, when so many American elites (Clinton included) dodged serving in the '60s and '70s, doesn't it ring a few alarms when they are so anxious to send other people's sons and daughters abroad to fight imperial wars?




(edited by Gavintzu on 29.9.02 2015)

And in the end, the love you take
Is equal to the love you make.
Promote this thread!
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 21 hours
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
that's almost like the difference beween the officers and grunts.

the officers command, the grunts die.

same thing with the government.

they wave a finger and send boys to die while the smoke cigars in a comfy chair half a world away...

that's why my dad got out of the serivce when he got the chance after WWII. he was offered a job in the OSS and took it. i could tell you more, but then i'd have to kill you all.


(edited by rikidozan on 30.9.02 0049)


Currently suffering from Pink Eye. First, chicken pox at 20, now pink eye. What's next, the mumps?
That's just my 2.461 Yen.
R-D-Z
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1272 days
Last activity: 1069 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
Some things change. Some stay the same. Things like this have been going on ever since the ancient Egyptians threw down roots on the Nile 5,000 years ago. Not a justification, just reality.
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 18 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#4 Posted on
Most prominent politicians avoided military service. There are a few exceptions that spring to mind - most notably the two guys Dubya went over - Gore and McCain.



"The only difference between lilies and turds are those humankind have agreed upon, and I don't always agree."
---George Carlin

"Facts?! Aw, people can use facts to explain anything that's even remotely true!"
---Homer Simpson
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1272 days
Last activity: 1069 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
It's amazing that Al Gore was a reporter in Vietnam with two bodyguards to protect the Senator's little boy while W was flying F-107s. But by pointing this out this probably makes me a satanic right-wing zealot or something.
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst








Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 85 days
Last activity: 85 days
#6 Posted on

    Originally posted by Grimis
    It's amazing that Al Gore was a reporter in Vietnam with two bodyguards to protect the Senator's little boy while W was flying F-107s. But by pointing this out this probably makes me a satanic right-wing zealot or something.


I doubt the liberals would call you Satanic. It's more in vogue to bash someone for christian ideals instead. Now, a christian right wing zealot; that's just a horrible person. Especially if you're a heterosexual male. If that's the case then you are just pure evil.




Maiden RULES!!!

Sure I've got a permit. It's called the Second Amendment.
-- Ted Nugent on Gun Control
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 3 days
#7 Posted on
Operative words in your post: "In Vietnam."

There was an interesting editorial in the Daily News by (I think) Zev Chafats that pointed out that only 2% of the population has ever served in combat, and so why should only 2% of the population make all our foreign policy decisions. This policy also would give women no say in weather we go to war or not. I'm not sure where I fall on this whole arguement, but it was food for thought.



Expressing myself EVERY day - but especially on July 22, 2002!
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 18 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#8 Posted on

    Originally posted by Grimis
    It's amazing that Al Gore was a reporter in Vietnam with two bodyguards to protect the Senator's little boy while W was flying F-107s. But by pointing this out this probably makes me a satanic right-wing zealot or something.


Yes, he proudly defended Texas from the Viet Cong until he went AWOL. I get misty just thinking about it.



"The only difference between lilies and turds are those humankind have agreed upon, and I don't always agree."
---George Carlin

"Facts?! Aw, people can use facts to explain anything that's even remotely true!"
---Homer Simpson
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst








Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 85 days
Last activity: 85 days
#9 Posted on

    Originally posted by MoeGates
    There was an interesting editorial in the Daily News by (I think) Zev Chafats that pointed out that only 2% of the population has ever served in combat, and so why should only 2% of the population make all our foreign policy decisions. This policy also would give women no say in weather we go to war or not.


I agree with this. We're a country of mostly civilians. It would be silly to force a requirement that the president be a veteran or even a combat veteran. I think military service is a good quality to have in a candidate, but it's not necessary. The president has his joint chiefs of staff to advise him in all military matters. It just gets annoying when leftists start bringing out the "old men in suits sending young men to die" routine. Like Grimis said, it's been going on for thousands of years of human civilization. Just replace "suits" with "togas" or any other ancient dress and you have the same argument. I have nothing to say to a vietnam vet who doesn't like that G.W. flew jets back home while they served "in country". But to any civilian who gets pissy about it I can only say "hey, at least he served in the armed forces. what did you do? go to England and smoke weed?"




Maiden RULES!!!

Sure I've got a permit. It's called the Second Amendment.
-- Ted Nugent on Gun Control
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1272 days
Last activity: 1069 days
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29

    Originally posted by Bizzle Izzle
    But to any civilian who gets pissy about it I can only say "hey, at least he served in the armed forces. what did you do? go to England and smoke weed?"


Or be like Clinton and go hang out in Russia for a while...during the Cold War.

Look at it this way. If only military men made the decisions regarding war, we'd have a problem(I think I would dispute the 2% number; it just seems low though it is entirely possible). Military men generally speaking think in military terms and do not take into account political ramifications(like Curtis LeMay's brillian idea to nuke Vietnam during that little skirmish; can you imagine!?!)
El Nastio
Andouille








Since: 14.1.02
From: Ottawa Ontario, by way of Walkerton

Since last post: 18 hours
Last activity: 4 min.
ICQ:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.33
The pure fact people question Bush's qualifications inregards to this lends more to the theory that the only reason why people are doubting him is because they're doubting his motives behind the strike. Pre-emptive strike? Glory hound? Power tripping? Proving something to his dad? Legacy? Eliminating someone who needs to be punked out? All aren't true, but all are being thought. No one for sure knows his motives but Bush himself, and because of that, people are guessing. Oh sure, he'll say stuff in his speech, but people still doubt the man's motives then.



Side note to Bizzle, I'm a Conservative white heterosexual male from rural Ontario and I'm Catholic. What does that make me? :)



Habs: 5-0-0-0. Defeated the Sens (my #2 team). 5-4
Renegades: Last place. All you need to know.
Man of the Week: Tim Raines, a class act who has retired from baseball
Goat of the Week: TBA
Next VG Review: Chorno Cross.
Next OSVG Review: Mike Tyson's Punchout

~EL NASTIO!
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 3 days
#12 Posted on
Democrats were not bringing up the "Chickenhawk" arguement because Conservatives were for war and they weren't. That would be silly. Democrats brought up this arguement because conservatives who supported the war questioned their Patriotism and committment to America's security when they wouldn't right Junior a blank check. And, as the Dems correctly pointed out, it takes a hell of a lot of Chutzpah to question of the Patriotism of someone who has served in combat for their country when you haven't, and anyone who does so ought to be ashamed of themsleves and apologize.



Expressing myself EVERY day - but especially on July 22, 2002!
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst








Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 85 days
Last activity: 85 days
#13 Posted on

    Originally posted by El Nastio
    Side note to Bizzle, I'm a Conservative white heterosexual male from rural Ontario and I'm Catholic. What does that make me? :)



My god man! Careful what you say! Do you want to draw the wrath of every politically correct special interest group down upon you? It's bad enough to be a white heterosexual male, who's rights and thoughts are dismissed so easily in this PC america. But to go so far as to admit to being catholic is just asking for trouble.




Maiden RULES!!!

Sure I've got a permit. It's called the Second Amendment.
-- Ted Nugent on Gun Control
Fuzzy Logic
Summer sausage








Since: 31.3.02
From: Happy Valley - Goose Bay, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

Since last post: 3220 days
Last activity: 2943 days
ICQ:  
#14 Posted on
I think the real problem for him is that he admits he's from ontario.

Now, as far as wartime recoreds affecting leadership of country, I figure it like this:

A person ain't have had to have been in the armed forces of the country they's a leader of, or any armed force for that matter. But, if they were, they best not have fought against the country they lead (unless it was to overthrow a represive regime, or something, yeah), or they best not have had any kind of dishonorable discharge or shit like that.




Jack Valenti fears NASH, EATER OF non-CHILDREN~!
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 18 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#15 Posted on
    Originally posted by Bizzle Izzle

      Originally posted by El Nastio
      Side note to Bizzle, I'm a Conservative white heterosexual male from rural Ontario and I'm Catholic. What does that make me? :)



    My god man! Careful what you say! Do you want to draw the wrath of every politically correct special interest group down upon you? It's bad enough to be a white heterosexual male, who's rights and thoughts are dismissed so easily in this PC america. But to go so far as to admit to being catholic is just asking for trouble.



Oh please, I'm a white heterosexual male, and let me tell you, the mountain of discrimination I run into is overwhelming! I can't even catch a cab in this town.

(edited by OlFuzzyBastard on 1.10.02 0910)


"The only difference between lilies and turds are those humankind have agreed upon, and I don't always agree."
---George Carlin

"Facts?! Aw, people can use facts to explain anything that's even remotely true!"
---Homer Simpson
Dahak
Frankfurter








Since: 12.5.02
From: Junction City OR.

Since last post: 2029 days
Last activity: 1681 days
#16 Posted on
There have some pretty good vets who were President. Ike is a good example. Then there are some pretty mediocre ones like Grant. And then there was the one who went out of his way to prove he wasn't a pussy and came closer to getting the US in a nuclear war. Of course most people think he was a good president but what is that based on?
But all things being equal I would vote for a Vet than a civilain. It shows a certain willingness to serve for their country.



Marge I am just trying to get into heaven not run for Jesus.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#17 Posted on

    Originally posted by Grimis
    But by pointing this out this probably makes me a satanic right-wing zealot or something.
Could you please cut way the hell back on the "please argue with me" sentences like above?



©CRZ™
Visit [slash] wrestling
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 3 days
#18 Posted on
And then there was the one who went out of his way to prove he wasn't a pussy and came closer to getting the US in a nuclear war. Of course most people think he was a good president but what is that based on?

Are you talking about Kennedy?




Expressing myself EVERY day - but especially on July 22, 2002!
Dahak
Frankfurter








Since: 12.5.02
From: Junction City OR.

Since last post: 2029 days
Last activity: 1681 days
#19 Posted on
Yes I am talking about Kennedy. On the domestic side he did do a lot. Started the process that got rid of segragation. But he was too hotheaded on the foreign side. Vietnam, Cuba, Berlin, and some other problems came up when he was President. To be fair a lot of that was because Kruschev didn't want to look like a puss compared to Stalin. But looking back at JFK and LBJ on the US side and Kruschev on the Soviet side it is damn amazing that there wasn't a nuclear war.



Marge I am just trying to get into heaven not run for Jesus.
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1272 days
Last activity: 1069 days
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
JFK(all and all) was not a bad president(certainly better than the schmuck who followed him, LBJ). He even lowered income taxes too.
Pages: 1 2 Next
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: Reorganize the U.N.
Next thread: the british connection
Previous thread: The Central Park Jogger
(2457 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Good to know the point's never lost on you, Bizzle.
The W - Current Events & Politics - Wartime recordsRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.145 seconds.