Military opinions and war experience

Originally posted by Army
Bush bashing occurs, when people have no grasp of the truth or facts:

Received his Masters Degree in Business Administration in 1975.

Bush was hailed by his Air Force commanders as one of their top 5 fighter pilots.

Bush flew the F102, one of the more difficult fighters to fly.

Bush served in the Air National Guard, as did hundreds of thousands of others during the Vietnam conflict. Are all those other thousands of airmen also cowards for not going to Vietnam? What about the millions that served all over the world during the same time, are they also cowards because they got stationed in Germany, or England, or Greenland, or Iowa? We've seen GW's military records, including his DD-214 (and the proven lies put forth by Dan Rather).........where is John Kerry's complete records?

Did I mention, the United States of America has elected him twice to lead the country? Apparantly, the majority of Americans find him quite worthy.

Seems like a rather commendable record for a "coward" and an "idiot".

I just returned from Iraq last March, after 15 months in-country (OIF-2). I fully understand what and why we are fighting for, and am ready to do it again. I am honored, and damned proud, to have GW Bush as my commander.

Bush jumped the queue to join a 'champagne' ANG unit where the rich hid their sons to avoid them joining in the war they'd pushed for - it was good for their businesses. He could have volunteered for combat but chose not to. He could have turned up for training (JIC he was called up, strangely he didn't - how did he know he wouldn't be called up? - other NG units fought & died in 'Nam) but he didn't.

People stationed in Germany etc could potentially gone to 'nam - somehow George wasn't worried about that!

Whether this actually proves cowardice is debatable, but hardly the actions of a hero. I wouldn't actually blame him for it if he hadn't sent many many US and UK boys to die in the sand. To committ others to do something you weren't prepared to do yourself seems cowardly to me.

As for the Idiot tag - I'm not sure. But I'm also unsure how a man with such an obviously poor intellect and 'individual' grasp of the language could possibly have an MBA - unless he bought it.

Are any essays / theses by the great scholar available on-line? I suspect not!

Top 5? On anti-seagull patrol? That's an insult to your Air Force. How he could be better than the 000's who actually went near danger is completely beyond me.

Try and find the BBC's 'The Bush Family Exposed' to see what a free media can tell you about your 'first family'

[edit on 17-6-2005 by CTID56092]

OOOPS!!

[edit on 17-6-2005 by CTID56092]

Well said Army, keep up the good work. You'll just have to remember that a great many of the posters on ATS seem to be mentally/intelectually challenged or simply closed minded, or both. It will not matter whether your postings/arguments are factual and eloquent or not, they will still carry on with their ranting & raving as if you had never said anything. There is nothing to be gained by debating issues with such people.

Just trying to deny ignorance! - sorry if my facts upset your world. As someone living in the free world I'm just trying to help you victims of lies and biased media

BTW don't insult people just because they have opinions other than your own! It reveals the shallowness of your intellect.

End of the day, I've not seen either side so far in this "Bash Bush" or "I

Originally posted by CTID56092
As for the Idiot tag - I'm not sure. But I'm also unsure how a man with such an obviously poor intellect and 'individual' grasp of the language could possibly have an MBA - unless he bought it.

Then no doubt Kerry would have been a better choice, eh?
Transcript shows Kerry's Yale grades similar to Bush




seekerof

"I always told my Dad that D stood for distinction," Kerry said in a written response to reporters' questions.

if i remember correctly Bush got one D while Kerry got four in the 4 years, that means Kerry is more intelligent. after all D stands for distinction.

The fact that the best two candidates to be found in the US were those two bozo's is your issue not mine. The choice we were given was better - but not by much.

I suspect those in charge favour stupid candidates they cause less problems by having no opinions or ideas of their own. It's more 'efficient' that way!

You guys are right, I spoke out of turn and I apologize for my outburst.

Let's keep this on topic: military opinions and war experience.

Talk politics in the PTS forum.

Bush bashing gets old; I should know, I've done enough of it! But, just bashing him doesn't belong here.
On the other hand, you can't really just talk about the war and not have a say about the President; he (and the VP and SECDEF) is the one who started this whole thing!

Originally posted by Astronomer68
You guys are right, I spoke out of turn and I apologize for my outburst.

No worries mate. I knew you meant 'them' anyway

Back on subject:

'Amongst rational people enthusiasm for war is directly and inversely related to personal experience of actual combat' - Discuss

[edit on 17-6-2005 by CTID56092]

Originally posted by yinyang04011
Bush bashing gets old; I should know, I've done enough of it! But, just bashing him doesn't belong here.
On the other hand, you can't really just talk about the war and not have a say about the President; he (and the VP and SECDEF) is the one who started this whole thing!

True. But we could discuss it without being 8 years old I have been one of the most vocal Bush haters on this site. Dont believe me? Ask Ed Singer. We have had some knock down drag out debates over Bush. The fact is, this thread is an attempt in civil debate. There is absolutly no reason to go around calling Bush a schmuck on this thread. We would do better to instead find the reasons why we think this and present those reasons in a manner that bodes intellect and respect.

Originally posted by CTID56092


'Amongst rational people enthusiasm for war is directly and inversely related to personal experience of actual combat' - Discuss

Well, when I started this thread, I would have agreed with this statement. However, since I wanted this to be a respectable thread, I have come to find that alot of the people I have bumped heads with are rational people who have their own reasons to believe what they do. Just because I dont agree with there reasonings, it doesnt make them or myself wrong. It just means that two rational people have two dofferent opinions and went about forming those opinions in a seperate but equal process.

Hi I serve the royal dutch army and my point about war is i am against any kind of war, war is always last resort last opstion if all opstion if all eforts faded or did not work.

i serve as a field soldier sniper under training, as part of our missions to learn differnt condition of enviroments we sereved in Bosnia, and i saw the areas were people use to live what was in development in construction dsestroyd because of war, i could not see a point why these people were put in so much pain and horror thousand were killed in that area.

when i joined the armed forces i had this in mind why i did it to serve my nation, to protect inocent people and never to become a patriote of killing others.

i respect all races and all cultures, religions... and i can not see the point why there is war in Iraq because of WMD world governments know there isnt any WMD what was, it was destroyed during the clean up and the the
U.S controls the air space of whole of Iraq it could have easily shown evidence of it.

When people say the army is heart less because they killed inocent poeple or abused them i believe what there are then viewing is wrong they forget that it are the politicians who have the power over the army they give us a instruction and we have to go there and do it, and another thing with the instructions is a story (WHY) it may be a lie but still we have to do it we cannot protest in operational war that is a form of treason and you get shot directly by an officer or any other in command for doing that.

if your looking for who is responsible for wars and crimes are the politician them selves. the Military does not start the war it fights the war the politicians start the war.

this is to all ATS members who serve or served the Military our first lessons on weapons handeling if you remember is that the rifle/gun should not be pointed towards any BODY when enemy is not in sight or when told it always should be pointed at posistion where nobody can get hurt so this would be a clear point that we have been told that shooting indirection civilions is wroung but when were we instructed that civilions are enemies then we have to, other wise it is murder and slaughter of inocent people.
and there is no such thing as a maniac who likes to kill people in the army all members are taught discipline other wise soldiers start shooting officers because they gave em instructions.

i am against the war in Iraq and feel that the iragies ar being betrayd and sluagtard every day because of a phony war that was only intended for oil and money.

Good to hear from you Interseptor.

I just want to say to everyone who has participated in this thread. THis has been probably the best thread discussion I've ever taken part in. By and large it has remained unfathomably civil. I hope we can keep it that way. Show them civvies how professional we troops can be.

Where on the topic war, then i just want to point another important thing in
a war which can be missused and has been miss used in a good example with respect of America is inteligence one of the key things when attacking
I am a sniper and my main job isnt really shooting sharp it is mostly inteligence gathering this to all snipers in the army they are mostly used to gather inteligence of enemies. The point is inteligence comes handy to attack the enemy and also for making people fools for instance U.S attacked Iraq which it did it had not used superior assualt even knowning that it has all info about Iraq it had not used its cruise missiles to attack the real key objects which were the main cause why the U.S gov was there the WMD sites it was carpet bombing mostly iraqi army in civilin cities/areas. so you could imagine this war of iraq as a wethear forcast first some heavy showers of bombs 900lb and then tornadoes meaning persision bombing and mass destruction. and then the army was sent in the troops to Iraq soil, this is because they first wanted the Iraqi army to be scard then in trouble and then pain in the end as thing cant get worse send U.S troops to handle it and what happens no resistance the Iraqis just give up and surrender. in the mean time U.S navy hasnt attacked and killed Sadam by launcing cruise missile at his compound but had waited, why this is beacause the GOV wanted to show Sadam is going to get arrested in bagdad because as you well know the Iraqi army was in utter pain and only wanted slowly to give up and Iraq would be in power in a few weeks under the U.S. But in the process making the iraqi army feel pain the civilions also got a shock and retailiated to a resistance and at this very moment is attacking Coalition forces.

But when sadam statue was taken down all got cool for a week and after that heavy resistance took place.

The U.S military had done the posible to more posible extent they mad the over taking of Iraq look easy but to keep hold was hard for the GOV not for the military you see what went wrong why there so much voilence is that when U.S took control they did not give control back to UN so that they may deside the Gov for iraq but U.S Gov realizes OIL AND MONEY and we cant send the troops back other wise there isnt a good shelter for the oil workers.

look it all was carefully planed and configured. the U.S inteligence does not have the objective to win the war in Iraq but just to deny it the war cant be won it only is on going will not stop until there is proper involvement of the Iraqi peoples decision at this stage it doenst matter any more it is vietnam conditions U.S cant leave Iraq because if thy do the Iraqi resistance will just over take the Gov and beacome another threat to the security of U.S. And also the U.S army is being swept in the war daily resistance.

this type of war is never ending until one leavses the battle good example RUS-AFGAN 80s war.

[edit on 18-6-2005 by Interseptor]

Originally posted by Army
Bush bashing occurs, when people have no grasp of the truth or facts:

Received his Masters Degree in Business Administration in 1975.

Bush was hailed by his Air Force commanders as one of their top 5 fighter pilots.

Bush flew the F102, one of the more difficult fighters to fly.



I just returned from Iraq last March, after 15 months in-country (OIF-2). I fully understand what and why we are fighting for, and am ready to do it again. I am honored, and damned proud, to have GW Bush as my commander.

You have voted Army for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

Originally posted by KidfingerI have been one of the most vocal Bush haters on this site. Dont believe me? Ask Ed Singer. We have had some knock down drag out debates over Bush.

I would agree with this statement.

Kidfinger just hasnt yet figured out yet why I am right...




[edit on 19-6-2005 by edsinger]

Well, at least there are people that support Bush as much as some don't.

Originally posted by Seekerof
Then no doubt Kerry would have been a better choice, eh?

Man, despite the way I feel about Colin Powell at this point, I sure wish he would have run for prez. in 2000. He would have been great.