It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Bush Deserter Issue Debunked

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2004 @ 08:59 AM
link   
nationalreview.com...

Shall we put this one to rest now. Maybe we can talk now about how Kerry who has tried about a dozen times in his career to CUT military spending, just b/c he went to Vietnam (i guess his presence helped us win that war....oh wait)




posted on Feb, 10 2004 @ 09:13 AM
link   
I don't see why anyone even brings up Bush being AWOL. The issue is he was a spoiled rich kid that avoided the DRAFT and VIETNAM in a sweet spot in the National Guard his Daddy got him... meanwhile under his pResidency, kids in the Alabama National Guard DIE IN WAR!

Bush is full of crap and you know it. He's a wuss, a whimp, a wussy, and any real Vet knows it!

Your National Review article
says it all. Read between the lines:


The fact is that previous combat experience or not, President Bush has (DONE NOTHING BUT TRY LIKE HELL TO)acquit himself well as a wartime commander-in-chief. Like Lincoln during the Civil War, he has been single-minded in his pursuit of U.S. security since 9/11 (MUCH TO THE CHAGRIN OF LIBERTY LOVERS AND THE ECONOMY ALIKE!)


He's tried so hard to prove he's not a whimp (the label Daddy spent his one term running from), he made himself a one-minded bully that forget the lessons learned by his loser Dad. It's the economy STUPID!

[Edited on 10-2-2004 by RANT]



posted on Feb, 10 2004 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
I don't see why anyone even brings up Bush being AWOL. The issue is he was a spoiled rich kid that avoided the DRAFT and VIETNAM in a sweet spot in the National Guard his Daddy got him... meanwhile under his pResidency, kids in the Alabama National Guard DIE IN WAR!

Bush is full of crap and you know it. He's a wuss, a whimp, a wussy, and any real Vet knows it!


Are you a Vet?????

If not then I don't think you have a leg to stand on. I suppose that since you say so then my uncle and cousin are not real Vietnam vets. Even though my cousin no longer has any legs and my uncle came home with the purple star, bronze star and medal of honor. They both think that Bush is the best Commander is chief that we have had in quite some time. But I guess they are not real vets.

It boils down to 2 years difference and a choice. The choice that many people here have stated that they would choose to do the same thing as bush now. Or even worse do like Clinton and Draft dodge. So for anyone that has said I will not go to fight a useless war just remeber Vietnam was seen as a useless war as well.


They were two years apart, these two Yale boys, these sons of privilege, and so the moment of truth came first for John Kerry, later for George W. Bush. Each faced the same life-changing question as did so many others of their generation: what to do about Vietnam.

RELATED CONTENT
WARS PAST, PRESENT: Bush, Kerry square off on Iraq, Vietnam

Kerry, class of 1966, decided late in 1965 to join the Navy, then had months to ponder his decision before enlisting after graduation. The war, his decision, his doubts, hung over him as he spoke at commencement the following June.

"What was an excess of isolationism has become an excess of interventionism," he told fellow students. He had to know his life was set on a course for Vietnam.

For Bush, class of 1968, his last year in college seemed to signal the end of innocence.

"The gravity of history was beginning to descend in a horrifying and disruptive way," he wrote in his 1999 biography. "By the time the ball dropped in Times Square to welcome 1968, the situation in Vietnam had escalated from a conflict to a raging war. Every night the newscast included a body count."

Bush debated his options over Christmas break at home in Houston, took a pilot aptitude test in January and chose the National Guard. He would fly fighter jets like his father. It is likely Bush knew the odds of going to Vietnam were low


www.freep.com...



posted on Feb, 10 2004 @ 09:39 AM
link   
You, like the article, are dismissing the issue by CONCEDING the issue?

'Yes, Bush did what he could to avoid Vietnam. Many people would if they had the choice.' That's what you're saying?


Way to "debunk" there. And I welcome your tangent that only war vets are allowed an opinion. Kind of builds up Kerry there sport. And makes Bush look like more a fool.

All you have left to do is bring up Clinton...


FYI - this issue means NOTHING to me. But for those that play the military card... i.e. REPUBLICANS. Kerry waxes your ass. Bush is a DRAFT DODGER friend. The Republican kind that couldn't get a Rhodes Scholarship is the ONLY DIFFERENCE in him and Clinton!

Please, please, please make this an issue. Try and downplay Kerry's service. Like the way Bush made a real war hero McCain into a commie sympathiser.


You guys will fry if you try that again. And THAT is what real vets won't stand for.



posted on Feb, 10 2004 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Like I asked earlier "Are you a Vet?" I don't know why I ask because you definitely don't seem to be.

Anyways, Bush served the military but was never called to go to war. I don't see where the problem is there atleast he choose to join the military rather than dodge it. Remember one thing Bush did not make the decisions on whether or not he was to go to war that decision was made above him and until you show me proof where his dad kept him out of the war there is nothing that was done wrong. Bush Showed up for work.

Now, since the REAL VIETNAM VETS will support kerry lets review the facts about Kerry.

Many felt that service in Vietnam was beneath them, and removed themselves from the manpower pool. That Kerry served at all is a reason for a bond with fellow veterans; that his service earned him a Bronze Star for Valor ("for personal bravery") and a Silver Star ("for gallantry") is even more compelling. Unfortunately, Kerry came home to Massachusetts. He joined the Vietnam Veterans Against the War and emceed the Winter Soldier Investigation (both financed by Jane Fonda). Many veterans believe these protests led to more American deaths, and to the enslavement of the people on whose behalf the protests were ostensibly being undertaken. But being a take-charge kind of guy, Mr. Kerry became a leader in the VVAW and even testified before Congress on the findings of the Investigation, which he accepted at face value.

In his book "Stolen Valor," B.G. Burkett points out that Kerry liberally used phony veterans to testify to atrocities they could not possibly have committed. Kerry later threw what he represented as his awards at the Capitol in protest. But as the war diminished as a political issue, he left the VVAW, which was a bit too radical for his political future, and was ultimately elected to the Senate. After his awards were seen framed on his office wall, he claimed to have thrown away someone else's medals, so now he can reclaim his gallantry in Vietnam.

As co-chairman of the Senate investigating committee, he quashed a revealing inquiry into the POW/MIA issue, and he supports trade initiatives with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam while blocking any legislation requiring Hanoi to adhere to basic human rights. I'm not surprised that there are veterans who support a VVAW activist, if only because there are so few fellow veterans in politics. Ideally, there'd be many more. If you are going to vote on military appropriations, it would be nice if you didn't disrespect the soldiers. Congress hasn't had the courage to declare war in more than 60 years, despite numerous instances in which we have sent our military in harm's way. Of all the "lessons of Vietnam," surely one is that America needs a leader capable of demonstrating in himself, and encouraging in others, the resolve to finish what they have collectively started.

But the bond between veterans has to be tempered in light of the individual's record. Just as Kerry threw away medals only to claim them back again, Sen. Kerry voted to take action against Iraq, but claims to take that vote back by voting against funding the result.

Why would a Vet vote for someone like this?



posted on Feb, 10 2004 @ 10:17 AM
link   


Why would a Vet vote for someone like this?


I will not vote for either I will vote Libertarian the only party that is honestly for freedom and self rule, you know the # us Vets fought for



posted on Feb, 10 2004 @ 10:32 AM
link   
You're doing it BlackJackal. Questioning Kerry's patriotism. Aligning him with "commies".. I freaking love it! Man, I call it, and the Bushies do it. You got away with that crap on McCain. You won't on Kerry.

I thought I made it pretty clear I'm not a vet (and don't care about Bush being AWOL), though I appreciate that you keep asking as if that makes a difference in who is allowed an opinion.

Bushies don't own "patriotism" and I find the effort laughable given the circumstances. I'm certainly not going to try to stop you. You just make Bush even more the fool with your Kerry bashing. The dirty commie that he is.


Now before you bring up your Uncle again or whoever the hell you know that was in a War, I could trot out my 9 toed and dead Vet relatives as well. They were poor so they went to war. Simple as that. And they were against the Iraq war and Vietnam, just like the minions of Vet's that now work on Kerry's campaign and think Bush is a war happy draft dodger.

I welcome the assertions, but I won't participate. If you want to pound this Commie Kerry theme you bury Bush on your own. After all, you're only questioning the patriotism now of the millions of vets like my Grandfather and Uncle that were against Iraq and Vietnam alike... and are equally against Bush.

Who gives a rat's ass about Kerry in the 70's? Isn't that your point about Bush? Can't have it both ways, though Republicans like to try!



posted on Feb, 10 2004 @ 11:49 AM
link   
......As well as Democrats Rant. The only reason that you didn't mention it when you said: "Can't have it both ways, though Republicans like to try!", is because currently, the Democrats are the ones on the offensive, per se'...correct?


No matter, the fires will get stoked once the DNC selects the Democratic presidential candidate.....and be rest assured, Kerry doesn't want to hang on this issue of Bush and military service very long. His closet has many skeletons in regards to this, just ask these folks:
www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com...



regards
seekerof

[Edited on 10-2-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Feb, 10 2004 @ 11:50 AM
link   
I say we put Bush and Kerry in the ring, no gloves and the last man standing wins. Instead of a war of words like big wussies, we see who is the stronger of the two and I am pretty sure Bush would end up laying on the mat face down in his own spit as he is nothing more than pussy boy who couldn't be a real soldier.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join