What's the difference between Vietnam and Iraq?
Dubya had a plan to get out of Vietnam.
...
US fatalities: 1106 (US wounded: 8016)
Fatalities since Bush said "Mission accomplished": 997
Fatalities since Bush said "Bring it on": 900
Number of casualties shared by Bush's stellar coalition of 30+
nations: 68 UK / 72 other.
(http://icasualties.org/oif/)
Obviously you do not know all the facts as to why we are losing so
many of our troops. When an enemy has no rules and the battlefield and
fighting are directed and decided by lawyers to avoid collatteral
damage, and not the experts (Generals) many of our troops will die.
CENTCOM has several lawyers watching the battlefield on TV monitors
they decide who what, where, and when we can shoot or drop bombs. If
you don't believe this read Gen. Tommy Franks book "American Soldier".
Like Nam we are a Police Force not as occupiers who invade destroy
without question anything and anyone, including leveling Mosques, who
resists.
[email protected] (Florida Patriot) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> What's the difference between Vietnam and Iraq?
>
> Dubya had a plan to get out of Vietnam.
>
> ...
>
> US fatalities: 1106 (US wounded: 8016)
> Fatalities since Bush said "Mission accomplished": 997
> Fatalities since Bush said "Bring it on": 900
> Number of casualties shared by Bush's stellar coalition of 30+
> nations: 68 UK / 72 other.
>
> (http://icasualties.org/oif/)
Kerry was for both of them before he was against both of them?
Uhh ... never mind that's not a difference.
Art
"Florida Patriot" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> What's the difference between Vietnam and Iraq?
>
"Charlie Self"
> Wood Butcher states:
>
> >Kerry was for both of them before he was against both of them?
> >Uhh ... never mind that's not a difference.
> >
> >Art
> >
> >"Florida Patriot"
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> What's the difference between Vietnam and Iraq?
>
> Sort of like Bush's daddy got him out of 'Nam and Cheney got him into
Iraq?
>
> Charlie Self
The officer in charge of W.s admission said there was no
pressure in any way to enlist him. Why do you guys need
to lie so often? Is it the frustration that people are not wanting
to go as far left as the party bosses would like ?
"Charlie Self"
> Fletis Humblebacker responds:
> >> Sort of like Bush's daddy got him out of 'Nam and Cheney got him into
> >Iraq?
> >The officer in charge of W.s admission said there was no
> >pressure in any way to enlist him. Why do you guys need
> >to lie so often? Is it the frustration that people are not wanting
> >to go as far left as the party bosses would like ?
> Of course there wasn't. Just like you neocons never have to insult people
to
> attempt to make a point.
It was an insult to say your lie was lying? Your resort to namecalling
is a sign of desperation or frustration.
> Since I don't belong to any political party, I'm not too interested what
way
> the party bosses want me, or others, to lean. I prefer to research, though
I do
> start from a liberal direction. I was a conservative, though never, thank
God,
> a neocon, until I grew up.
But your "growth" didn't include embracing facts for what they are.
Interesting.
"John Barry"
> "Fletis Humplebacker"
> <snip>
> > But your "growth" didn't include embracing facts for what they are.
> > Interesting.
>
> Nice name- is is a pseudo, or nom-de-plume?
>
> Your "grasp" of the "facts" and the "truth" are soooo Orwellian.
How so? The officer in charge of enlisting Bush claimed there was
no external pressure. I have no reason to believe he's lying.
I think you are guilty of your own accusations.
> This is a democracy, where we can form our own opinions, based on
> facts as we see and interpret them. And, because mine is almost
> certainly different from yours in any respect, it's not necessarily
> true that either of us is lying. At least, I'm not.
Facts are facts and of course you are welcome to form any
opinion you want. The fact is that my response was to Charlie Self
but don't let that slow you down.
Fletis Humblebacker responds:
>> Sort of like Bush's daddy got him out of 'Nam and Cheney got him into
>Iraq?
>>
>> Charlie Self
>
>The officer in charge of W.s admission said there was no
>pressure in any way to enlist him. Why do you guys need
>to lie so often? Is it the frustration that people are not wanting
>to go as far left as the party bosses would like ?
>
Of course there wasn't. Just like you neocons never have to insult people to
attempt to make a point.
Since I don't belong to any political party, I'm not too interested what way
the party bosses want me, or others, to lean. I prefer to research, though I do
start from a liberal direction. I was a conservative, though never, thank God,
a neocon, until I grew up.
Charlie Self
"When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not
hereditary." Thomas Paine
"Fletis Humplebacker" <!> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
<snip>
> But your "growth" didn't include embracing facts for what they are.
> Interesting.
Nice name- is is a pseudo, or nom-de-plume?
Your "grasp" of the "facts" and the "truth" are soooo Orwellian.
This is a democracy, where we can form our own opinions, based on
facts as we see and interpret them. And, because mine is almost
certainly different from yours in any respect, it's not necessarily
true that either of us is lying. At least, I'm not.
John
"GregP"
> "Fletis Humplebacker"
> >The officer in charge of W.s admission said there was no
> >pressure in any way to enlist him. Why do you guys need
> >to lie so often?
> You are lying if you say that you really believe that during
> the Vietnam era you could slip in and hide out in the Guard
> after college without influence. I don't know if you are just
> pretending to be ignorant on a lot of issues or you really
> are, but it's not healthy in either case.
Joining the Guard wasn't slipping in as you put it. A great
number of pilots that flew missions in Vietnam were in the
Guard. What's your evidence that national guard enlistment
was by influence alone? You are also calling the officer in
charge a liar because he doesn't suit what you want to believe.
Please don't lecture people about reality.
Wood Butcher states:
>Kerry was for both of them before he was against both of them?
>Uhh ... never mind that's not a difference.
>
>Art
>
>"Florida Patriot" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> What's the difference between Vietnam and Iraq?
Sort of like Bush's daddy got him out of 'Nam and Cheney got him into Iraq?
Charlie Self
"When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not
hereditary." Thomas Paine
"Fletis Humplebacker" <!> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "GregP"
> > "Fletis Humplebacker"
>
> > >The officer in charge of W.s admission said there was no
> > >pressure in any way to enlist him. Why do you guys need
> > >to lie so often?
>
>
> > You are lying if you say that you really believe that during
> > the Vietnam era you could slip in and hide out in the Guard
> > after college without influence. I don't know if you are just
> > pretending to be ignorant on a lot of issues or you really
> > are, but it's not healthy in either case.
>
>
> Joining the Guard wasn't slipping in as you put it. A great
> number of pilots that flew missions in Vietnam were in the
> Guard. What's your evidence that national guard enlistment
> was by influence alone? You are also calling the officer in
> charge a liar because he doesn't suit what you want to believe.
> Please don't lecture people about reality.
OK, I've stayed out of this up until now, but I'm going to say one thing . .
. I had served in the "black shoe" Navy in the late 50's, after all "active
reserve" time was up(never could figure that one out . . "active" meant no
drills, but you were still subject to callup, "inactive" meant drill
status), then in '64 joined the USNR Seabees. We had people joining fresh,
as well as finishing out their reserve commitment after active duty. There
was a point where we were sitting "on the bubble", as they were going to
call up, IIRC, about 3 or 4 of the reserve Seabee Battalions to go to 'Nam.
Luck was with me, as the unit I was part of wasn't one of those called up.
My point: being in Reserves or Guard was no guarantee of staying home &
"safe".
I'm done.
--
Nahmie
The law of intelligent tinkering: save all the parts.
"Fletis Humplebacker" <!> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>
> ..You are also calling the officer in
> charge a liar because he doesn't suit what you want to believe.
> Please don't lecture people about reality.
I consider it probably that the officer who processed Bush's
application was not part of the decision-making process.
Of course if he was, and he did show favoritism then he
would be the first person to come forward and admit it, right?
Personally I consider it to be a non-issue.
--
FF
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:13:51 -0700, "Fletis Humplebacker" <!> wrote:
>
>The officer in charge of W.s admission said there was no
>pressure in any way to enlist him. Why do you guys need
>to lie so often?
You are lying if you say that you really believe that during
the Vietnam era you could slip in and hide out in the Guard
after college without influence. I don't know if you are just
pretending to be ignorant on a lot of issues or you really
are, but it's not healthy in either case.
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:36:19 -0700, Fletis Humplebacker wrote:
> What's your evidence that national guard enlistment
> was by influence alone?
Here's my evidence: I was drafted in 1969, and between the time I got my
draft notice and the time I was to be inducted, I tried to get into the
National Guard. I wasn't eager to go because, unlike, George, I wasn't in
favor of the war. It was impossible, because there was already a waiting
list a mile long. I joined the Air Force, instead, on the theory that I
might find a tour at an airbase more survivable than a tour in the
boonies, and indeed I did survive.
The unit of the Texas Air National Guard that George jumped the line to
get into was even more special than most Guard units because those who got
into it had absolutely zero chance of going to Vietnam. This was because
the unit's aircraft was designed for one purpose and one purpose only-- to
shoot down longrange Russian bombers coming in over the Pole. It was of
absolutely no use whatever in Vietnam. This was widely known among the
Texan rich ole boy network, which is why so many sons of privilege ended
up joining the outfit,and why it was called a champaigne unit.
It's true that some Guard units did go to Vietnam. I loaded bombs on
Guard F-100s at Phan Rang Air Base for part of my tour. But anyone who
thinks George wasn't chickening out when he joined that unit is very
poorly informed about the realities of the time. And if you were a young
man who tried to get into a Guard unit during those years, you'd be pretty
sure that George's daddy had to pull some strings, particularly that
particular Guard unit.