Who's the bigger hero?

[JT]

How is it that the Republicans can claim that George Bush, a guy who never saw combat in Vietnam, is more qualified to lead America in a time of war, than John Kerry, who served an entire tour plus four months in actual combat in Vietnam? Even if the medals Kerry received were questionable, the point is Kerry went overseas and put his life on the line for America while GW jr. hid inside USA’s boarders as a member of the National Guard. In addition, what the hell is wrong with saying the Vietnam war was wrong and atrocities were committed? These are facts that no one can deny. Atrocities were committed by both US and North Vietnamese forces. It was wartime, and by definition, it’s atrocious.

[JT]

I probably should have mentioned Cheney in this post too; he felt he just had better things to do.

[RoofleChicken]

Miltary service didn't seem to be important when Clinton was president now did it? Bob Dole was a REAL war hero. Sure didn't help him. Kerry's service (what there was of it) should be honored and respected. However neither Bush nor Kerry's military service qualifies or disqualifies them as a leader. In fact I don't think it makes a damn bit of difference. Roosevelt led this country through the greatest war in history without military experience. There are a number of others as well. To define a good president based upon this sole issue is very superficial. It is only an indicator, and a thirty year old one at that.

[JT]

... neither Bush nor Kerry's military service qualifies or disqualifies them as a leader. In fact I don't think it makes a damn bit of difference. ....It is only an indicator, and a thirty year old one at that.

So everything the swift boat vets for "truth" have to say is all meaningless rhetoric eh?

[RoofleChicken]

So everything the swift boat vets for "truth" have to say is all meaningless rhetoric eh?


For me it is. I sure as hell don't want to be judged solely on the decisions I made in my twenties when I'm fifty. If criticism of Bush and Kerry is the objective there are far more relevant and recent events for both of them to delve into. What happened or didn't happen in 1969-1971 is not where I base my voting decison.

[Chief]

RoofleChicken, I like your avatar, and I like the way you think... ;)

JT, my friend, listen to what Chicken is saying... :)

First of all, Vietnam was a travesty. 58,000 Americans dead, returning vets treated like shit, corruption everywhere (all together now, "L-B-J" ) - indescribable atrocities (NVA atrocities), it just goes on and on...hell, I didn't want to go either, and I joined the Texas National Guard...does that make me a traitor? Not hardly.....'Nam wasn't about protecting America - I get smoking mad when I think of the sacrifices made not for the sake of protection, but in the interest of political fat cats and greedy defense contractors... :mad:

Here's my list of what I want my president to do for me, and my
country, in order:

1) Protect America and its citizens from attack, both foreign and domestic. Absolutely #1 priority.

2) Preserve the moral fiber and integrity this nation was founded upon.

3) To the best of his/her ability, maintain a strong, vibrant economy. Most nations since the dawn of time have been defeated/overthrown due to an economic breakdown, not a military one.

86) Display a heroic Vietnam war record.

Let's never forget the people who sacrificed their all in the Vietnam conflict and always remember the lessons learned from it...then, let's FORGET it. The direction this country takes in 2004-2008 won't be influenced in any shape or form by Vietnam. My grandkids will read about Ho Chi Minh in a world history book. They will deal with Zarqawi, Bin Laden and Al-Queda now, today - and you'd be wise to elect a leader who knows how to confront the enemy of the 21st century.

Bush ain't the sharpest drawer in town when it comes to international terrorism, and neither are Powell/Rumsfeld....but believe me, you don't want John Kerry running the show - that is, unless government entitlements are your idea of a strong America :eek:

Kerry wants one thing: to return the Democratic party to power. If you think anything different, you're just kidding yourself. ;)

[lefty]

I just don't want anyone that got low C's in college get the chance to have his finger on the 'button'.

(shudder)

:cool:

[JT]

For me it is. I sure as hell don't want to be judged solely on the decisions I made in my twenties when I'm fifty. If criticism of Bush and Kerry is the objective there are far more relevant and recent events for both of them to delve into. What happened or didn't happen in 1969-1971 is not where I base my voting decison.

Well said Roofle. If it's not relevant though, why do the Republican special intrest groups keep bringing it up?

I didn't know you were in the National Guard Chief. Thanks for doing your duty and serving our country. Kudo's Chief. And, once again, you've managed to take an issue that normally devides the parties and put it in terms that we all can agree on. I'm gonna push it though and ask a few more questions. How is the war in Iraq anything other than a war "not for the sake of protection, but in the interest of political fat cats and greedy defense contractors."? Halliburton is paying $1000 per section of blast wall that comes all the way from Turkey when we could be paying the Iraqi's $100 for the same section of wall and we would be putting the Iraqis back to work and stimulating their economy. This is only one example. Are we really interested in rebuilding Iraq? I'm not so sure that America is exactly a hotbed of moral behaviour these days either. As a group, we could be doing a lot better in a lot of ways. And finally, in precisely what way has the Bush administration encouraged a strong, vibrant economy? The economy was doing way better under the Clinton administration.

[lips905]

:) America needs a president that will take good care of Canadians L.M.A.O

[RoofleChicken]

Well said Roofle. If it's not relevant though, why do the Republican special intrest groups keep bringing it up?

For the same reasons the democratic party special interest groups bring up Bush's National Guard service record. Both parties relish slamming the other guy...truth be damned. They always appeal to visceral issues that will hopefully inspire hatred of the other candidate. They're quite good at it. I honestly don't know why anyone would want to subject themselves to it.

How is the war in Iraq anything other than a war "not for the sake of protection, but in the interest of political fat cats and greedy defense contractors."?

The war on terror cannot be limited to Al Quaeda alone. The terrorist threat is far bigger than that. All the availabl intelligence suggested that Iraq did indeed posess WMD's. Not just US intelligence, but British MI 6, Russian FSS and the Israeli Mossad said the same thing. We've since discovered we were wrong. However if youread the final report you'll see where Saddam was merely waiting for sanctions to expire (and sucessfully bribing government officials in France, Germany and Russia to speed this along) so he could rebuild his WMD program. Saddam was a shrewd SOB. Read the final report....not just the 10 second media soundbites. By acting pre-emptively we set a strong example that we will strike at any time, anywhere we see a threat. This policy works....look at Libya. They didn't want to be next. Diplomacy may still work with Iran and the Noko's but now they know we will use military force if necessary. Would Kerry? Nobody knows. I don't think he would. Everybody knows Bush will. Right after 9-11 Bush told the world we'd go after them wherever we found them. Saddam funded terrorists and also paid bounty money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. He provided sanctuary, arms and funding for training. He was a brutal despot the world is far better for having disposed of. Regardless of the root cause or excuse for goingto war it helps achieve or ends of getting rid of the threat. It's a lot better to fight them there than here. It's not a war over oil (if it was gasoline would still be $1 a gallon) and it's not about corporate greed. It's about good versus evil. That simple.


Halliburton is paying $1000 per section of blast wall that comes all the way from Turkey when we could be paying the Iraqi's $100 for the same section of wall and we would be putting the Iraqis back to work and stimulating their economy.

Haqdn't heard about that. If true it is something that should be investigated.

Are we really interested in rebuilding Iraq?

Absolutely. A stable, secular, democratic Iraq can be the keystone of spreading freedom hroughout the Middle East. It forces the other countries there to begin to open us because their people will want what life in Iraq has to offer. Our society demands instant gratification and it is irrational to xpect Iraq to be fixed overnight. It took Germany four years after WW II to have it's first election. Read your history. None of this is new under the sun.

I'm not so sure that America is exactly a hotbed of moral behaviour these days either. As a group, we could be doing a lot better in a lot of ways.

Exactly. This is why haveing a president with a strong, proven moral fiber is so important. We've lost touch with morality in this country, Every other time in history a great nation has had that happen it fell. Think about it.

in precisely what way has the Bush administration encouraged a strong, vibrant economy? The economy was doing way better under the Clinton administration.

Economies always function in cycles. While the policies of a president can affect an economy to some degree there is simply no way an economy to sustain continued growth perpetually. We did have great years under Clinton. The natural correction cycle happened to coincide with the jobs lost by the terrorist attacks. Since that time the economy has been restoring jobs and picking up steam. When you've been around as long as I have you've seen this kind of theing before. Again it's not new under the sun.

[JT]

While I disagree with the core ideology of most of your points, thanks for taking the time to post well thought out responses Roofle. This is the kind of discussion I was hoping to inspire.

[airart1]

and its not done in a day.....that's one thing i don't understand........the president told us it wouldn't happen in a day.....it's the body bags thats make this war wrong.....and the power thing for the democrats, they havn't been out of power in forever......as far as the haliburton thing, there's only 2, maybe 3 companies could do the job themselves.....and the iraqi's r working at repairing there country, just last week the citizens uprose and killed some insurgents......and insurgents r terrorist........i live next to a 5th special forces man and he has been iraq twice since it started, he says we kill 20 to 100 to 1 american and there all from other countries, not iraqi's.......if kerry would take a stand on any one thing, then maybe i would consider him, maybe.....i'm a veteran also, i know first hand what the dem's do to the military, if we pull out of iraq before the job is done, it would be a catastrophy...we would be fighting the terrorist all over the world.....i really mean all over the world.....and bush is doing the right thing with the economy.....being a business man for the last 20 years, i know what the tax gig is......and the cuts for businesses is what fuels the economy, easier to open them for one thing which creates jobs and gives people paychecks, the unemployment is at an all time low, even better than the clinton era.....but the clinton era was so good it was just the eforium of the nation, we didnt have any war, not because we weren't being attacked, we were just ignoring it as best the liberal media could.....and yes the media is trying to manipulate your thoughts and thinking......i'll pick a man which stands up for his way of life and has conviction for his actions, he is an american, like me......god bless him......

[Chief]

You bring up some good points, JT - allow me to respond....

Negative campaigning is about to make me throw up. There's been a couple of times I honestly wished there was a way for both candidates to lose. Hate ads DO work...that's why they're used...simple minded people who don't know their ass from a gin handle will help determine the future of a 300-million strong nation based on nothing more substantial than this bullshit... :rolleyes: And both parties are getting worse and worse about it.

I was pleased to see the last two Bush ads...one with the girl whose mother was killed at the WTC, and the other using wolves as symbolic of lurking terrorists. Let's hope Kerry does the same. Based on his latest ad accusing Bush of negligence over the Iraq explosives cache scandal, I'm not real optimistic.

Who knows about that Halliburton blast wall scenario you mentioned. On the surface it doesn't sound right...but there may be reasons we're not aware of. Look - if anyone feels Halliburton is adding billions to their bottom line from revenue generated in Iraq's oil fields, they need to march their asses down to Merrill Lynch and buy some shares of HB stock....it's a public company, after all. Buy as little or as much as you like.

The economy? I'd say Bush has done a decent job, considering the havoc brought about by 9/11 and the recession he inherited when he took office, which wasn't Clinton's fault, either. As Roofle pointed out, it's cyclical. I am, however, NOT pleased with the huge amount of spending on behalf of the current administration - one can only hope that won't continue should there be a second term.

Canadians? Most of them (particularly those living in the eastern provinces) feel Americans are idiots - and that we've betrayed our neighbor to the north. I think the media has done a hell of a good job of making US-Canadian relations a lot worse than what they really are. I keep hearing of one incident that sticks in the craw of nearly every Canuck I talk to...and that's the friendly fire incident that killed four brave Canadian troops fighting in Afghanistan, and as I understand it a presidential apology was never given. It should have been...wouldn't have taken 30 seconds. Isn't it funny how much impact the little things have .....

My National Guard tour of duty? Let me explain, since there seems to be such negativity about the Guard these days.

At the time, ALL draftees were sent to 'nam. It was just an automatic deal. The draft order was determined by lottery..and I was number 24. :eek: A call to a friend at the local Selective Service office brought news that I was about 10 days away from being processed...and I flat wasn't interested in a Vietnam assignment. I have nothing but respect for those who served...I hope vets don't brand me as a sissy....but that doesn't change the fact that I was NOT going...and I did something about it, that day. I waltzed my ass into our local Guard unit office and enlisted.

After boot camp and AIT training, I moved to Boulder, Colorado - a veritable hotbed of antiwar sentiment and protesting. I was a trained gunner on an 8 inch howitzer, and also trained to combat civil disobediences, which happened damn near every day for months and months. I bet our unit was called out 50 times - I found myself confronting friends who hated that war just as I did...it wasn't easy - in fact, it got pretty ugly - but we did the job we were committed to do.

Our unit was a better trained artillery battery than most of the units in the battlefield...and only a last-minute decision by someone in the Pentagon kept us all from being shipped out to Saigon.

Point being - NG folks are a lot more than just "weekend warriors" who want some time away from their bitchy wives once a month - and who sit around and drink coffee for hours on end. I served my country, proudly - not on the intensity level of a combat situation, of course - but nothing to be ashamed of, either.

Anyway, this is starting to ramble, so I'll sum up just like Chicken did...it's good vs evil in the end. I honestly feel that's what drives GWB. Hell yes, he's made lots of mistakes...but as I said before, mistakes or not, I feel Bush wants what's good for the people. Kerry wants what's good for a particular political party.

'Nuff said.

[airart1]

what he said..........