Bush and the Army that supports him.

I hear countless people spewing the same crap about how "Bush did this to our military", "Bush did that to our military", "He's let down our military". So answer me this: If all these things are true, then why does the majority of the military still favor Bush? Surely if he betrayed them in so many ways, they'd hate him; however, the military is largely in favor of Bush!

I don't know how to aswer this one taking in cosideration that most of my husband friends are in the military "Marines" and some in the national guard and they all so far has oposed the war with their coments, and they are not blind as to the reason of the ivasion in Iraq.

Oh, I get it your are talking about the "Army" hummm maybe that is the reason we have only heard bad coments, my husband and I don't have friends in the army.:shk:

As I stated in my Military back Bush polls, this should be an eye opener to those who listen to the biased media, the military doesnt like the media either.

Let's get something straight. A few quick facts for ya'll.

1st) Yes, the overwhelming majority of the military, not army only, supports Bush. How do I know this? Because I've served. No, not in this war, however, my time spent there got me some of the closest people I have ever became friends with. All but one of them support Bush and what he is trying to do.

2nd) Yes, the military isn't biased. They see it as it is, it is a shame that the media doesn't report the NUMEROUS good things that we are doing in Iraq, only the bad It's a shame, but those who are not IGNORANT to the facts would know we are doing a boat load of good over there. And in Afghanistan.

So, thats it folks. Yes, the military loves Bush. No suprise to me, really. There is no real way that these Bush-hatin' bandwagoners can say that "Our military hates Bush!" Truthfully, you cannot say that, because, to put it simply:

It isn't true.

-wD

Heres a quick answer $$$$$$$$$$$$$ and lot of it. He has increased military pay in huge sums. Improved the quality of housing and other facilities on all military posts. Other pay such as Housing allowances and Separtion pay for deployements etc. Have increased greatly. Bush backs the military pay wise so they back him. It's all about the money.

I am a kerry fan though and am in the army. I do enjoy the pay increase. I currently receive $500.00 a week in pay. I live in my house for free pay no water electricity gas sewer etc. I have complete full coverage healthcare and dental for me my wife and 2 children. I had 2 children via c-section and never paid a dime. I have had 3 hernia related surgeries and never paid a dime. I could keep going. I have not been to iraq as I was in korea for the first year of the war and no am in a unit in virginia that is deactivating next year and moving to korea.

Basically its about the money. A large portion of our income is also untaxable such as BAH(housing money if you live off post) And Bas (Money for food)This makes for large tax returns via the child income tax credit increase bush gave. Most my income is nontaxable so I fall in a low income tax bracket so I receive almost 4,000 dollars in income tax return for my 2 children. See why now!

This is simple really...

If they don't support Bush and realize that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake then that would mean...::gasp:: they were wrong. 1000 innocent civiallians all killed in vain...can you say "oops"?

I think if I were in their shoes I'd have a hard time realizing the truth myself...

[edit on 10/28/2004 by Lecky]

Originally posted by Hoppinmad1
Heres a quick answer $$$$$$$$$$$$$ and lot of it. He has increased military pay in huge sums. Improved the quality of housing and other facilities on all military posts. Other pay such as Housing allowances and Separtion pay for deployements etc. Have increased greatly. Bush backs the military pay wise so they back him. It's all about the money.

I was in the Army, I got out last year. I'm also a Kerry fan, as are all of the Iraqi veterans from my old unit (51st SIG, Ft. Bragg).

It's kind of an Urban Legend that Bush wants to give soldiers more money. I guess because it sounds like something he should want to do. But unfortunately, pay cuts are coming. He tried once, and he's trying again if he's elected, and he doesn't have an election to lose..

July 02, 2003

Editorial: Nothing but lip service
In recent months, President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress have missed no opportunity to heap richly deserved praise on the military. But talk is cheap � and getting cheaper by the day, judging from the nickel-and-dime treatment the troops are getting lately.

For example, the White House griped that various pay-and-benefits incentives added to the 2004 defense budget by Congress are wasteful and unnecessary � including a modest proposal to double the $6,000 gratuity paid to families of troops who die on active duty. This comes at a time when Americans continue to die in Iraq at a rate of about one a day.

Similarly, the administration announced that on Oct. 1 it wants to roll back recent modest increases in monthly imminent-danger pay (from $225 to $150) and family-separation allowance (from $250 to $100) for troops getting shot at in combat zones.

Then there�s military tax relief � or the lack thereof. As Bush and Republican leaders in Congress preach the mantra of tax cuts, they can�t seem to find time to make progress on minor tax provisions that would be a boon to military homeowners, reservists who travel long distances for training and parents deployed to combat zones, among others.

Incredibly, one of those tax provisions � easing residency rules for service members to qualify for capital-gains exemptions when selling a home � has been a homeless orphan in the corridors of power for more than five years now.

The chintz even extends to basic pay. While Bush�s proposed 2004 defense budget would continue higher targeted raises for some ranks, he also proposed capping raises for E-1s, E-2s and O-1s at 2 percent, well below the average raise of 4.1 percent.
Army Times

whats being said versus whats done though is different. I have seen my pay go up. I have gotten 2 pay raises a year for the last 4 years. One at the beginning of the year january and one on my year anniversary. I also have seen bah increase to where it acutually covers living expenses. The seperation pay was increased and was going to go down but didn't. The pay is better trust me.

Also just in my first 4 years I have seen massive increases in the quality of equipment. All our junk is going out the door and new modern equipment is coming in. I am a 63b. A lightwheel vehicle mechanic. I like my new tools and my od green frieghtliner trucks to work on versus 1965 model 2/1/2 ton trucks.

[edit on 28-10-2004 by Hoppinmad1]

Originally posted by curme
I was in the Army, I got out last year. I'm also a Kerry fan, as are all of the Iraqi veterans from my old unit (51st SIG, Ft. Bragg).

Oh wow, I didn't know you were from up here. Or stationed anyway. ECK was too. I try to read the Fayettville blogs and letters to the editor, and it is really mixed.

No doubt there's a tremendous amount of what I'd call more quiet support for Bush. Almost "benefit of the doubt" support, with a we'll see attitude once we get through this. I mean, mostly coming from families of course...because active just don't talk about it or aren't here.

But alot of the returnees are vocal, and some are ANGRY! Some are flat out pro-Kerry, some just anti-Bush, some don't care about politics...they're just pissed about Iraq.

Mixed bag. There's no brainwashing or anything like that. It's just you don't hear much til people get home, then it's kind of spilt between people not willing to say much and a few screaming from rooftops.

Of course, both sides seize on anyone on their side, but it's totally unjustified to paint the troops as a whole being one way or the other IMO. Talk about individuals all day. But saying "the troops" support Bush? Or they support Kerry?

That's bull#. They don't share one brain. These are people. Not a partisan voting block.

Come live on an AirForce Base, youll see firsthand what the numbers are.

Who cares what the military thinks.

1) They have never been known for their brains (over all, not the few).

2) They are paid to do a job, like it or not, and it's usually not.

3) He is in their chain of command, so the propaganda is high in the military (it's more of an environment).

4) The military is typically conservative (generally).

5) Because you fight, does not mean you know more about policy and good long range plans than anyone else.

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Who cares what the military thinks.

1) They have never been known for their brains (over all, not the few).

2) They are paid to do a job, like it or not, and it's usually not.

3) He is in their chain of command, so the propaganda is high in the military (it's more of an environment).

4) The military is typically conservative (generally).

5) Because you fight, does not mean you know more about policy and good long range plans than anyone else.

As a decorated Iraqi veteran I agree 100%!

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Who cares what the military thinks.

1) They have never been known for their brains (over all, not the few).

2) They are paid to do a job, like it or not, and it's usually not.

3) He is in their chain of command, so the propaganda is high in the military (it's more of an environment).

4) The military is typically conservative (generally).

5) Because you fight, does not mean you know more about policy and good long range plans than anyone else.

That is one of the most disrespectful things I've ever heard about the military.

It's true that they are paid, but it's a volunteer army. They volunteer to fight for what they believe in. And with your number 4, maybe there is a REASON that the military is typically conservative. That was the point of my post. And yes, if you are directly involved with what's going on, you usually know what's going on better than most people. I think it's pretty damned messed up what you said. Be glad that we live in a country where you can say it (And the right to say things like that about the military being defended by that very same military)

Originally posted by Lecky
1000 innocent civiallians all killed in vain...can you say "oops"?

hard time realizing the truth myself...

[edit on 10/28/2004 by Lecky]

You said it all there, get the facts right....

Originally posted by Herman
That is one of the most disrespectful things I've ever heard about the military.

What exactly is disrespectful about how I see the truth? If I had an agenda or hated the military or it's members, I could see how it could be like that. But I don't, nor have I alluded to it, so chill out.

It's true that they are paid, but it's a volunteer army. They volunteer to fight for what they believe in.

So nobel, but nobel means nothing in a war. I wish it was true my man, but Hollywood and bumperstickers don't make it so. Many join for college, or because they need to get out of a crap place and get a job that can make you into someone better off than those around you.

And with your number 4, maybe there is a REASON that the military is typically conservative. That was the point of my post. And yes, if you are directly involved with what's going on, you usually know what's going on better than most people.

1) The reason they are typically more conservative is the capacity of their jobs. It's the environment of "work hard and you can make it" kind of mentality. Make it on your own, etc.

I think it's pretty damned messed up what you said. Be glad that we live in a country where you can say it

(And the right to say things like that about the military being defended by that very same military)

Glad to be of help. I have and will continue to defend our country.

I'd actually agree with KJ on this one.

And another reason ... Kerry is against the war. Bush is for the war. Apparently most service men and women see Kerry's opposition to the war as an opposition to them; which really is not surprising, seeing as how Bush tries to draw this conclusion every time he speaks on the subject.

So instead of seeing that Kerry opposing Bush putting our troops' lives on the line for an optional war that did not need to be waged, they see it as Kerry not supporting them. When in fact, he seems to respect their lives more than Bush, since he wouldn't just send them off to fight a war we didn't need to fight, with fewer forces than need be, etc. And the troops seem to forget that Kerry put his life on line to fight for this country like them, so he should understand the sacrifice far greater than Bush, who simply did what he could to avoid Vietnam.

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
What exactly is disrespectful about how I see the truth?

I don't know. It might have something to do with.

Posted By KrazyJethro1) They have never been known for their brains

Or maybe

Posted By KrazyJethroWho cares what the military thinks

If that's not disrespectul, I don't know what is.

So nobel, but nobel means nothing in a war. I wish it was true my man, but Hollywood and bumperstickers don't make it so. Many join for college, or because they need to get out of a crap place and get a job that can make you into someone better off than those around you.

I agree that some join just for money or a better life, but does that mean that you shouldn't care what they think? Just because some of them join for not-so-nobel reasons, it's cause to just discount all of them? By the way, the democrats would just looove to not get the military votes counted.

1) The reason they are typically more conservative is the capacity of their jobs. It's the environment of "work hard and you can make it" kind of mentality. Make it on your own, etc.

Or maybe it's because they know that what they're fighting for is a worthy cause. FIRST-HAND. They know who they're fighting, they know who they're killing, they know why. Christ, am I the only optimistic one around here anymore?

Glad to be of help. I have and will continue to defend our country.

Are you in the armed forces? Seriously, maybe I missed something.

originally posted by W_HAMILTON
And another reason ... Kerry is against the war. Bush is for the war.

Now that's wrong right there. Kerry isn't against the war...well it's hard to tell. He was for the war, then refused to fund it, then was against the war.... Now he just says that he can fight the war better than Bush. So no, as of now, I don't think Kerry says he's against the war. He may have changed his mind though

And the troops seem to forget that Kerry put his life on line to fight for this country like them, so he should understand the sacrifice far greater than Bush, who simply did what he could to avoid Vietnam.

Kerry tried just as hard as Bush to avoid it. But Bush was from a rich family, Kerry was not. Kerry signed on with the "Least dangerous" squad that was supposed to get combat experience, and it quickly turned into the most dangerous (According to Unfit For Command). These were the days of the draft, and Kerry couldn't avoid it. *Note* I still respect him for his service*** That's another reason Bush is against the draft. All the rich people get out of it, and all the poor people have to serve...their morale is down etc. etc...



[Edited on 29-10-2004 by Herman]

[Edited on 29-10-2004 by Herman]

Originally posted by Herman
Now that's wrong right there. Kerry isn't against the war...well it's hard to tell.

No it's not. He is against the way this president jumped to war.

He was for the war, then refused to fund it

I believe that Kerry and some other senator came up with a bill that proposed a way to fund the 87 billion thru specific means, rather than simply taking 87 billion out of the budget with no real way to pay for it. I think it was then voted down, and Kerry ended up voting against the final bill which appropriated 87 billion without specifying exactly where it would come from. So he refused to write a blank check when we could have easily diverted the 87 billion from another source to fund the troops, but the other congressmen didn't agree.

Kerry tried just as hard as Bush to avoid it.

You have non-biased sources to back that claim up?

I don't know where you even think that most of the military supports bush. Almost everyone I work with supports kerry. Why does everyone think of the military personelle as some seperate entity. No we are not civilians but we were. We are from every where in the country and the world made up of every race and religion. I meet people from all over on a daily basis. I hear a lot of people for bush but just as many for kerry. Bush is not supported all out like you think. It is just incorrect for someone in the military to say bad things about him.

The military is one of the most diverse groups you could ever have and if it's pretty much 50 50. The way The polls show.

Giuliani said yesterday, "no matter how you try to blame it on the president, the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there."

Taken from: story.news.yahoo.com.../ap/20041029/ap_on_el_pr/bush_bad_news&cid=694&ncid=716

Good job Rudy Apparently the only person who's been critical of the military's performance lately has been no other than Republican darling Rudy Giuliani. I guess it just shows more desperation on their behalf, that he feels the need to bash our troops rather than simply lay blame where blame belongs.

No problem. In a few days Bush will go down and Rudy, much like the rest of his Republican buddies, can jump off Bush's bandwagon in a blaze of glory as they both apologize for the comments they made trying do whatever they could to get the guy elected and distance themselves what will be looked back upon as the politcal cancer that Bush really is.

I can't wait