God bless our young soldiers

I'd proudly wear the brand "Liberal" than be a snivelling blamer of Clinton for Bush's incompetence.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Oct 16 2006, 07:44 PM) [snapback]333769[/snapback]</div>

Surely, that's an intentional oversimplification on your part...?

Don't you think that, just maybe, some of our actions as individuals might have helped percipitate all of this mess? I'm willing to re-examine how I live and how I might make changes to that lifestyle, in an admittedly feeble attempt to encourage change.

I had this great dream last night...what if we all as Americans began to consume less voluntarily...and then the movement gains strength and we're encouraging each other to do more, like during WWII -- not just because of the urgings of public officials, but because WE as individuals take responsibility for ourselves and our obligation to each other, and our future, and the Nation -- and then, as time goes by, we begin to be known as a country (and a *people*) with the discipline to choose abstinence if necessary, and make difficult decisions, and the perspective to know what's *really* important...instead of choosing to exploit the natural environment and peoples of the world for primarily nationalistic purposes designed to preserve the internal balance of power, as well as the status quo...

And then I woke up.

 

"I was saying we have great young men fighting for our country."

I would much rather see these great young men developing alternative energy, working to promote international cooperation and trade, educating children,working to find cures for autism and cancer, or creating music, literature and art. And all young people everywhere doing these things as well.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Oct 14 2006, 03:49 PM) [snapback]332801[/snapback]</div>

A noble thing for him to do, but did you consider perhaps God is telling us he doesn't want us over there? After all, he did put the oil under their land.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Beryl Octet @ Oct 18 2006, 04:44 PM) [snapback]334718[/snapback]</div>

I don't understand how God could have been so careless as to put the oil in the middle east. Some omnipotence!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jared2 @ Oct 18 2006, 04:36 PM) [snapback]334710[/snapback]</div>

This is sooo nice and ideal, it is throughly sick.

Sorry, I personally, don't want to live in a giant Disney Land where every one is happy, healthly, productive, and smiling all the time.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Oct 18 2006, 03:55 PM) [snapback]334723[/snapback]</div>

Not to worry Squid, living in Florida, you'll still have fire ants, hurricanes, alligators, Kathrin Harris... :lol: h34r:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Oct 18 2006, 03:55 PM) [snapback]334723[/snapback]</div>

Don't worry; doesn't seem to be much danger of that happening. You'll be relieved to know that there's suffering enough for everyone!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Oct 18 2006, 04:55 PM) [snapback]334723[/snapback]</div>

I assume you like autism, war, oil dependence and cancer. Don't they call that masochism? By the way, Disney Land is pretty much the opposite of my idea of a good world. In a way, you make a good point, albeit inadvertently. Suffering is necessary to an appreciation of what is good in life. But don't you think the balance is a little skewed toward too much suffering? But then again, if you're a masochist, there is never enough.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Oct 18 2006, 01:23 AM) [snapback]334317[/snapback]</div>

When George W. Bush joined the Texas ANG in May 1968 , his father was a second year US Congressman . . . A Republican. The President of the USA at that time was Lyndon B. Johnson . . . A Democrat.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it's the President who calls-up Reserve and National Guard units. Don't think for a second that the President will avoid calling-up a particular unit because some snot nosed second year congressman from the other party has a fighter pilot son in that unit . . . especially when said President was a Naval Reserve officer in World War 2!

Saying George W. Bush hid out in the reserves is a load of crap! You didn't read the time lines of his service in the link I gave, did you.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Oct 18 2006, 01:23 AM) [snapback]334317[/snapback]</div>

The 'commitment' I referred to is of time, not of lifelong career choices. “Hiding out in the reserves does not entail almost two years of full-time training to qualify as a fighter pilot. If he was really looking to avoid war, wouldn't he have asked for a desk-job, rather than a position which potentially would have put him in harm's way as a fighter pilot?????
Why did he leave the Reserves? The fact that there was a glut of pilots who were getting little or no flight time probably helped with the decision.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Oct 18 2006, 01:23 AM) [snapback]334317[/snapback]</div>

I'm beginning to wonder if you can discern better . . . :huh: I KNOW BUSH DIDN'T DO THE SAME! <_<
In all my 20 something years, I have NEVER, EVER, EVERRRRR seen a Commissioned Officer (what Bush was) clean toilets, do Kitchen Patrol, or stand guard (unless it was a cushy ODO or OOD stint). And boo hoo, officers aren't picked for working parties either!!!

Sure you aren't just a little bit biased?????? I do . . . . a lot!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jared2 @ Oct 18 2006, 01:36 PM) [snapback]334710[/snapback]</div>

And I would have much rather seen those 19 great young men . . . the ones who hijacked those airplanes, flew them into buildings, and killed 2,973 people – developing alternative energy, working to promote international cooperation and trade, educating children,working to find cures for autism and cancer, or creating music, literature and art.

Wake up and smell the coffee brewing in your avatar! THEY WANT YOU DEAD!!!! Every American working on alternative energy, etc . . . isn't going to change the world . . . unless, of course, it becomes a paradise acceptable to Islamic Radicals! Your paradise is not acceptable . . you will be assimilated or killed . . . their choice! <_<

 

Boy, you are an angry sod. From what I have read of your biased posts, nothing I say will change your slim point of view, but hear goes...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Oct 20 2006, 04:03 AM) [snapback]335431[/snapback]</div>

Sure, bucko, but Bush had friends in high places. If George wanted to fight, he could have gone over there, like Kerry (among others) did...but George did not want to fight. He would have not fought. He was a first class citizen, who could not get his hands dirty.

No bubble busted. HOWEVER, as I know, and most historians agree, Bush had friends in high places. But whatever.

Oh, and I have not noted yet, but did you serve?

Yeah, his dad was a brave man. He really was. Makes me wonder why his son was not.

Again, you believe want you want. He was a pilot so he could get the chicks. Not to fight in VN. He could have gone to fight, but did not.

You are a monkey. Am I right? Because before anyone becomes a CO, they have to do some sort of basic training, be it in the ROTC or wherever. And while there, I am sure he did not do any dirty jobs. Not George. Why would he have then, when he won't now?

I am biased? A card carrying Republican, who voted for Reagan, Bush the first, Bush the second, Bush the Governor...I have voted Republican more then I have voted Democratic. Sure, I voted for Clinton twice and Kerry once, but that is because they were the right men for the job. Too bad Kerry lost. To call me biased made be correct: I am biased towards men who will do the job. Not some monkey who can't even say 'nuclear' or recognize that Iraq HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11.

Yeah, I am so biased. I want the guy who was responsible for 9/11 dead. Not some innocent soldiers, fighting a war that is so wrong, that even high ranking REPUBLICANS are urging us to leave.

Why don't you wake up and smell the coffee. While we are in IRAQ, we are creating more and more people every day that hate the USA. We are more in danger now, then we were five years ago. And that is thanks to a megalomaniac president who put us in a war, that his own dad wrote a book against.

 

I think it's pretty obvious that GWB received special treatment during his years of Service...I mean, flying obsolete (even then) F-102A interceptors in a champagne unit of the Guard...c'mon!

To me, this topic exemplifies the power the GOP has over its supporters.

Somehow, the members of the base think that they are just like him...when, really, it's the differences which are worth noting.

The reality of the matter is that he comes from an elite American dynasty, more established in business and politics than even that of the Kennedys. He has always had friends in the highest places, and always will.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Oct 20 2006, 04:33 PM) [snapback]335812[/snapback]</div>

Yes. Thank you for that post.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Oct 17 2006, 12:23 PM) [snapback]334066[/snapback]</div>

1) You're right on both counts. He was commissioned and it is trivial. Civilians don't know the difference.

2) Been there, done that. Pilot school takes about a year. Checking out in an individual aircraft takes a month or two more. The tactical mission is usually learned back home in the squadron. That appears to be the extent of Bush's "serious commitment involving years of training, study, and tests," according to records. By doing this, he escaped being drafted. He got into this elite unit only because of his dad's status. This, too, is well documented.

3) Done that too. When I was in the Navy reserve, I was required to show up for drills. Sure, I could miss one now and then, but pull that trick too often and your fitness report will guarantee no promotion or even staying in the unit for long. We never had make-up days for the simple reason that special training was scheduled during regular drill periods that wasn't available on other days. We could volunteer for extra flying but nobody confused these STARPS as a substitute for drill weekend. And you'd better show up for summer camp too.

4) Lots of people get Honorable Discharges. It takes a pretty good sized offense for an officer to get otherwise. They are usually just happy to get rid of a slacker and let him go the easy way if he hadn't stolen the silverware or something. Especially when his dad is a U.S. Congressman.

As a veteran, I'm surprised you give Bush a pass on being AWOL in time of war. The Texas ANG was about as safe a place to be during Viet Nam as your momma's lap, yet he couldn't even get that right. He skipped out of his commitment and flipped the taxpayers, who paid to make him a junior birdman, the bird. I remember Dan Quail got out of draftee status by joining a unit that was laughingly called, "The Indianapolis 500." But I have no argument with him. He did his time and served honorably and completely.

Long before I had any great feelings about Bush's intelligence, I gave him a thumbs down for character. I signed up voluntarily and had to do my time and I never complained. He did the absolute minimum necessary to keep out of Viet Nam. Sorry, that was wrong. Clinton did less, and he is on my shirker list too. You'll find no praise of Clinton's military history from me. There is no "my dog is better than your dog" here. Both were without character. You lose a lot of credibility by backing Bush's miserable record. Wrong is wrong, on either side.

I was enlisted before I was an officer. I did all the dirty jobs you mentioned. Officers don't pull KP. Neither do CPOs as I remember. Rank has its privileges, both commissioned and enlisted.

All that said, I raise my glass in toast to an absent brother, Petty Officer Monsoor. You're right: the Medal of Honor looks appropriate here. If an officer and an enlisted man wearing a MOH meet, the officer salutes the enlisted man first. This might explain to civilians how highly that is held.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Oct 20 2006, 12:33 PM) [snapback]335812[/snapback]</div>

And don't forget that Joseph Kennedy was killed in action in WWII while John served on his PT boat and suffered lifelong pain for injuries sustained.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Oct 18 2006, 01:04 PM) [snapback]334637[/snapback]</div>

In WWII, Americans were not self center focused like they are today. I think it's going to take a whopper of a hurtin laid on America on American soil before the current 3 youngest generations change their mindset from being completely self centered to being "Proud of America" centered. By whopper, I'm thinking 25 million dead across all the major cities. This 3k dead and a couple buildings was only big enough to capture our attention for about a month.

I think it will have been easier for the America of the WWII era to come together with the war effort because the America of that day was much more morally conservative as a whole. Dig out the percentages of people who were pro abortion, pro gay, Godless, prayerless, broken families, and all of the other things at the center of todays great moral debate. America is spilt on these issues now and I think it would make it impossible to ever come together to be unified on the 'War Effort' if America were ever attacked to such a degree where we needed to gel into a war effort.

War Effort - making personal sacrifice of time, energy, convenience, money, effort at the home front to put everything toward the war on whatever front it was being fought.

That's just talking about trying to get a grim reality response to a monster attack. I can't think of anything that would get America to "just start using less" of anything besides common sense. Seemingly more and more (especially in this thread), Americans are refusing to use any amount of common sense or reasoning.

Not Bush was the answer in 2004... I imagine it's the answer in 2008 as well. What a thought provoking platform. Very creative and should solve the problems of the nation. hahahaa.. Absolutely Brilliant!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Oct 21 2006, 05:13 PM) [snapback]336157[/snapback]</div>

See, here's a mentality I can't understand...

So he didn't serve in a war... SO WHAT?!

You're pulling that, "I had to walk 5 miles through a snowstorm to get to school when I was a young lad...., and you must too..." mentality.

Most of the best major league sports coaches have never played professionally. Most CEO's of fortune 500 companies didn't have to clean toilets, do dishes, or work at McDonald's either....

What about the one armed man who can't serve? Is he any less qualified to run the country?



It's one thing to simply state you don't like Bush for whatever reason, no matter how irrational it might be (i.e. I just don't like the way he looks, I don't trust him...) which is fine too by the way, I'd never think any less of anyone)), but don't make ridiculous arguments to justify it....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Oct 30 2006, 10:21 AM) [snapback]340581[/snapback]</div>

Where's your cut-off for the 3 youngest generations? As a member of the so-called Generation-X, I would be among the oldest of the 3 youngest generations. I find your sweeping statement about the younger generations to be ageism. You seem to be implying that we're the ones who need to get our heads together and stop screwing up. If only we'd think the way our elders thought, everything would be so much better.

By the way, the 3 youngest generations, according to wikipedia are:

• Generation X (1961-1965) – (1980-1981)
• Generation Y (1976-1982) – (1995-2001)
• New Silent Generation (2001) – TBA**

Now if you're not including infants through 5-year olds in your assessment of the generations, you must be including the Baby Boomers (1943-1946) – (1957-1964) as part of the "3 youngest". If so, you're automatically indicting President Bush and most of Congress.

No judgment. Just sayin'.

As a thinking American, I find your implication that my way of thinking is somehow wrong to be condescending and insulting. Is there only one way to be a "proud American"? Am I supposed to shut my mouth and blindly follow my "leaders" when I think they're leading me off a cliff?

The last time I checked, we don't live in a fascist state, so forget it.

I know what it means to be an American. My great-grandfather came here from Italy in 1907 at the age of 17. He was alone. My grandfather was the first of my family to be born here and he served in WWII (my dad was 3 when Pop was drafted) . Can you imagine what that must have been like for him to be drafted, knowing he was leaving his wife & son to possibly fight against his father's countrymen? Or whether he took abuse from his unit because he was Italian? I've imagined all those things and more. And it's given me more of an appreciation of being an American than I had when I was learning about being one in school.

You believe you're right. And that's fine. I have no issue with that. Just quit implying that those who don't agree are wrong.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Oct 30 2006, 06:40 AM) [snapback]340586[/snapback]</div>

Here is a mentality I CAN understand: Self-centered and vitriolic.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see." (John Heywood, 1546)

"So he didn't serve in a war... SO WHAT?!" What a clueless remark! Ask the mother of a lost son that question, why he is dead while others weaseled out.

Not once did I say Bush was bad because he didn't go to war, which pretty well deflates the rest of your argument. What I talked about was responsibility: taking care to do what you agreed to do, especially if that thing got you out of something dangerous. I have no argument with those who didn't volunteer and missed the military by luck. Even those who went to Canada back then paid a price for their convictions. Bush couldn't even defend his home town, flying fun F-102s around safe Texas skies.

What I deplore are those, like Bush and Clinton and Cheney, who were devious and evasive to protect themselves and their precious time while others, with fewer resources to work with, went over and died or were maimed in their place. Quite simply, these greedy "leaders" took everything they could while skipping out on their country. Point out the ridiculous part of my argument about that.

As far as dumping on them just because I hate them, it's a mixed bag. Bush is high on my dislike list while Clinton is his counterbalance: I like him, except on this issue. Rumsfeld, who I deplore about as much as anybody I can think of, is OK here with me. He joined the Navy and did his tour honorably, so he gets my respect for that. You don't have to walk the five miles in a snowstorm UNLESS you agreed to do it and others are counting on you pulling it off.

If a major league coach is hired, he damned well better fulfill the terms of his contract or he'll be coaching in Duluth the next year. Not our "heroes." They go on forever. I don't know what your comment about CEOs doing menial work is about, but I'd suggest that they might be better CEOs if they had done so and experienced a little of life in the trenches. Being enlisted for a year made me a much better officer when that time came. Your question about a one-armed man being qualified to run the country is just dumb. Republicans booted out Max Cleland, who lost an arm and two legs in combat, as being weak. They weren't afraid of him kicking back!

My original post was directed to a retired Navy CPO (I'm guessing,) a high enlisted rank with a lot of authority. I couldn't understand how a man of his experience, never mind my own far lesser service, could overlook the actions I mentioned. But I know I'll accept his reasoning a lot easier than yours. You come off as a hateful, humorless spreader of screed, leaving chaos and destruction in your wake, without a positive thought or a hint of human kindness. Why that is remains between you and your therapist.

Can you understand me know?