So Dubya was the smart one...

Manic Moran

bonkey wrote:

I perhaps read too much into your use of the term veteran for Bush (assuming you meant Kerry wasn't a veteran), but on reflection you seem to have been saying that while they are both veterans, Bush is seen as the honourable one.

That's correct. I wasn't meaning to say that Kerry wasn't a veteran, which is obviously not true. Bush's campaign is just more 'gentlemanly' about it. Maybe if he had done more we might have heard more about it, and had that shoved down our throat too, but he didn't. The Kerry Campaign made damned sure we know that he had been awarded whatever. That may or may not have been Kerry's call, but he was tainted by association over it. Basically Kerry was perceived as making more out of is service than it was worth, and Bush wasn't.

Indeed, its the opposite - he's getting knocked because there clearly is more to say.

He's getting knocked because of the way he's saying it. He just needed to have said "I was in Vietnam, here's a picture of me looking all commandingly at the bridge of my craft", and that's it. The thing about most awards is that they're not really your fault if you earn them or not. You don't try to get wounded, and you don't try to put yourself in positions that result in getting Silver Stars. This is why troops object to the term of phrase "I earned a Silver Star" or whatever. You don't earn them, you are awarded them. Some people who are plenty brave come home with nothing at all simply because they were never put into a position where any bravery becomes apparent. This doesn't knock the respect that one gives a chap who is wearing the medal, as it is evidence that he is worthy of the respect, but that's far different from saying that "Just because I've got a medal and you don't, I'm better than you," which is the way that the campaign seemed to be running it.

NTM

Sparks

MM, how do you reconcile that belief that the Bush campaign was "gentlemanly" with the facts behind the whole Swift Boat Veterans for Truth smear campaign?

Manic Moran

Sparks wrote:

The point was that he was using his military service record to bolster his political career.

He arrived in an S-3. It's flashy, a chopper could have probably done the job just as well, but hey, I think the Viking guys probably appreciated the attention. If you're going to fly in one, you wear a flight suit. Nothing particularly dramatic or devious about that.

And you're somehow saying that this was a character defect?
Unless you're posting from Iraq right now Manic, you've got a pretty self-incriminating case there.

I am still in my unit, with my friends and colleagues who got shot at with me, (My 'band of brothers,' if you wish) and have not requested early release from duty. Kerry left his unit, and got out early.

Did they go home to their own beds every night during the week?
You can't say that weekend warriors were seeing as much active service as full-time soldiers, it defies reality.

I don't. You said "Saw action", not "saw active service." The two are different. In the cases of the draftee clerk at Schofield, a volunteer 2nd Cav tanker in the Fulda Gap in Germany, or Bush the Continental Air Defense Pilot in the Air Guard in Texas, they all saw the same amount of action, and all were available for use if there was a need for them. All is equally honoured service around here.

MM, how do you reconcile that belief that the Bush campaign was "gentlemanly" with the facts behind the whole Swift Boat Veterans for Truth smear campaign?

Don't need to. SBVT was a crowd knocking Kerry's service, I don't believe it did anything to 'grandiose' Bush's role. I don't believe there's been a 'gentlemanly' political campaign in the US in decades. I was referring solely to any references to military service in his campaign.

NTM

Sparks

Manic Moran wrote:

He arrived in an S-3. It's flashy, a chopper could have probably done the job just as well, but hey, I think the Viking guys probably appreciated the attention.

Oddly enough, the carrier crew later complained at being required to get within 30 miles of port and then wait for Bush to wake up and take his trip out on the Viking.

I am still in my unit

And if one of your unit at the end of his tour decided to return home rather than sign up for another tour, would you think ill of them?

all were available for use if there was a need for them

Something that's still in dispute with regard to Bush.

Manic Moran

Sparks wrote:

Oddly enough, the carrier crew later complained at being required to get within 30 miles of port and then wait for Bush to wake up and take his trip out on the Viking.

Yeah, the carrier was ahead of schedule by a couple of hours. When the whole S-3 idea was dreamed up, the carrier was supposed to be so far from land that a helicopter wouldn't be feasible. When this proved not to be the case, they decided not to change the plan. In any case, this is fairly irrelevant to the service argument.

And if one of your unit at the end of his tour decided to return home rather than sign up for another tour, would you think ill of them?

Never really came up. Everyone fought tooth and nail to stay.

NTM

Sparks

Manic Moran wrote:

In any case, this is fairly irrelevant to the service argument.

Not really. You said Bush didn't rely on his time in the service, I point out that he in fact used it in a staged photo op which kept servicemen from home after a ten month tour in a war zone.

Never really came up. Everyone fought tooth and nail to stay.

I'm not sure if that's dodging the question or answering it through implication.

Manic Moran

Sparks wrote:

Not really. You said Bush didn't rely on his time in the service, I point out that he in fact used it in a staged photo op which kept servicemen from home after a ten month tour in a war zone.

How did he use it? He could have served as a cook, and he'd still be in a flight suit if flown via S-3. Or he could have been a total civilian. Any time you see a journalist go for a joyride in the back of a military jet, he's in a flight suit.

If merely wearing the clothes is a claim about prior service, then how do you explain Clinton in a Flight Jacket?

I'm not sure if that's dodging the question or answering it through implication.

Bit of both, really.

NTM

Sparks

Manic Moran wrote:

How did he use it?

Oh come on. There are things that simply require too much suspension of belief to be given weight and one of them is the idea that Bush's time in the air national guard was never intended to be reflected by that photo op.

Bit of both, really.

So you're looking at your band of brothers and thinking "I love you guys, but if any one of you decides not to ask to come back to a war zone, you'll be a schmuck in my eyes?". What happened to showing up, doing your job and going home and that's all real soldiers want to see?

Sand

Man I wonder how many months you were sitting on that waiting to pull that post out.

Waiting to catch you out on a completly hypocritical post about how the media can twist someones comments into something completly different to what they intended? And give it far, far, far more attention than it deserves?

Well lets see.

You made your post about Snow being a closet member of the KKK because he referenced a Brer Rabbit tale on May 19th and I referenced your hypocrisy on November 1st so that would be ....166 days (thanks excel). You can convert that to months at your own leisure.

Cant say I didnt warn you though. Will you learn anything from it though? Probably not.

And as I said only an idiot would openly critizise the men and women in the military unless they wanted to end thier political career.

Thats funny - I dont recall you claiming that only an idiotic White House secretary would openly racially insult something like 20% of America. Or more actually, if you allow that Americans in general would find racial slurs objectionable in general.

Im sure the US miliatary arent 20% of the US population, though Id accept the US population find slurs on the US military to be objectionable in principle.

Personally, Im willing to accept Kerry tripped over his words - he lost to Bush so he cant be all that smart. Maybe someday others will share my ability to ignore short term political advantage in favour of the long term good of the political system. Pray with me Hobbes.

Add to that some US TV station did a top 10 scandals of the current administration and only one of those (number 2) was a Democrat.

Amazing even that the Bush administration can be associated with Democrat scandals - they're Republican afterall. Or even that the Democrats can be blamed for the current administration seeing as theyre not it.

BTW I reserve the right to correct this post as needs be.

Manic Moran

Sparks wrote:

So you're looking at your band of brothers and thinking "I love you guys, but if any one of you decides not to ask to come back to a war zone, you'll be a schmuck in my eyes?". What happened to showing up, doing your job and going home and that's all real soldiers want to see?

It's obviously going to be situation dependant, but I think the overriding feeling would probably be more a form of disappointment. Yeah, you'd feel good for the guy, he's going home and will be with his family, but why isn't he fighting to stay like the other guys?

NTM

Victor

Manic Moran wrote:

Yes. The difference is in how it was being presented. I don't recall Bush ever going around touting his Air Guard service much.

Because he couldn't.

I don't. You said "Saw action", not "saw active service." The two are different. In the cases of the draftee clerk at Schofield, a volunteer 2nd Cav tanker in the Fulda Gap in Germany, or Bush the Continental Air Defense Pilot in the Air Guard in Texas, they all saw the same amount of action, and all were available for use if there was a need for them. All is equally honoured service around here.

But the long standing allegation is that Bush welched on his responsibilities.

Yeah, the carrier was ahead of schedule by a couple of hours.

Weren't the crew complaining that Bush's stunt actually delayed them getting home?

Nope. Not forgetting. I don't think any rational person is seriously saying that the valour awards were not earned.

He's getting knocked because of the way he's saying it. He just needed to have said "I was in Vietnam, here's a picture of me looking all commandingly at the bridge of my craft", and that's it. The thing about most awards is that they're not really your fault if you earn them or not. You don't try to get wounded, and you don't try to put yourself in positions that result in getting Silver Stars.

So were they earned or not?

Surely someone in the Navy could 'easily' sit on an aircraft carrier / cruiser / whatever for their entire tour, whereas Kerry was very much at the pointy end of things and if he was repeatedly awarded then he wasn't exactly a workshy REMF.

I am still in my unit

Remind me. For the last few months which of the following have you been (a) downrange (b) driving a desk (c) doing computer support?

Manic Moran

Victor wrote:

Because he couldn't.

Yes, there's a top end limit, but I don't think he pushed it any more than reasonable, even given his limited action.

But the long standing allegation is that Bush welched on his responsibilities.

You can allege anything you want.

Weren't the crew complaining that Bush's stunt actually delayed them getting home?

I seem to recall so, yes. They could have been back a couple of hours earlier if they hadn't had to do Bush shuttle service.

So were they earned or not?

"Deserved" might be a better word.

Surely someone in the Navy could 'easily' sit on an aircraft carrier / cruiser / whatever for their entire tour, whereas Kerry was very much at the pointy end of things and if he was repeatedly awarded then he wasn't exactly a workshy REMF.

You miss the point. He had greater opportunity to show his mettle under fire. The vast majority of awards are from units at the pointy end. Not because they have the best soldiers, but because they are most likely to be in a position where any interesting actions would come up.

Remind me. For the last few months which of the following have you been (a) downrange (b) driving a desk (c) doing computer support?

Well, I'm off to Irwin for TCGST tomorrow. The emphasis was 'with my unit.' You should know as well as anyone that the primary motivating factor for a troop is the guy next to him, in his unit. Unit comes home, I come home with it. Unit goes out again in 2008/9, guess what? I go with it. Not on my priority list of things I want to do, but if my guys are going, I should too.

NTM

Victor

Manic Moran wrote:

Yes, there's a top end limit, but I don't think he pushed it any more than reasonable, even given his limited action.

What action did Bush see?

Well, I'm off to Irwin for TCGST tomorrow. The emphasis was 'with my unit.' You should know as well as anyone that the primary motivating factor for a troop is the guy next to him, in his unit. Unit comes home, I come home with it. Unit goes out again in 2008/9, guess what? I go with it. Not on my priority list of things I want to do, but if my guys are going, I should too.

But what of all the guys currently in Iraq. You aren't there for them.

Manic Moran

Typo. Actions.

They're not my unit. They're not people I was assigned to train with or lead.

NTM

Sparks

They're not my unit.

I don't think you can take that line and then criticise Kerry for returning home after being wounded in action three times while saving his unit from harm. Well. You can, but you have to accept being a hypocrite...

Liam Byrne

Mr. Bush's straight talking....

You're kidding, right ? Lying through his teeth about the reasons for invading Iraq, and (when challenged) changing his story 5 or 6 times is "straight talking" ????

You'd get more honesty and straight talking from Charlie or Bertie !

Nick_oliveri

Keith Olberman did a peice on this on MSNBC!

Watch it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq7JUi1lQc4

BlitzKrieg

Nick_oliveri wrote:

Keith Olberman did a peice on this on MSNBC!

Watch it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq7JUi1lQc4

Oh wow...that was very impressive.

Victor

BlitzKrieg wrote:

Oh wow...that was very impressive.

Olberman 2008.