Open letter to all.

[anonymous]

Originally posted by Sceadu
It never hurts to be informed.  That should be the first thing one does before forming an opinion.

  I'm a disabled vet.  I served in the Navy before a lot of you were even born.  As far as I'm concerned, the worst person to be commander in chief is a chicken hawk like Bush, who used his father's influence to avoid service in Vietnam, then avoided most of that "cush" berth too after he was grounded from flying for failing to achieve a required physical (public record here, folks, available for anyone to see).  After being refused a transfer to Alabama twice, to a unit which didn't have the type of planes he was trained to fly, they finally granted the transfer after he'd ALREADY moved to Alabama anyway.  No one at the base remembers seeing him, including both the CO and XO of the unit.  His pay records reflect the fact that he was unpaid for that period. At no time after that did he ever regain flight status, after the first grounding, and despite having wasted thousands of taxpayer dollars to train him.  Most notable during his supposed Alabama service was the fact that he went on an arranged date with President Nixon's daughter, and they sent the presidential chopper to pick him up (again public info, readily available to anyone with the guts to look).  Again, no one else in the unit recalls this incident occuring on base - which is where he should have been. I'm pretty sure I'd remember if the president's helicopter came to my duty station.  Who knows where Bush was actually picked up at the time?  No one from the Alabama Guard unit, that's for sure.  Where does Bush go next?  He's transferred to an administrative unit based out of Denver, Colorado.  Why?  To make up lost time from his missing days, as required at the time. He never shows up in Denver for his administrative duty, either.  He is, instead, already enrolled at Harvard Business School, and asks for an early discharge to attend school - after the fact.  It is granted.  No reason given for why.  Here's a man, supposed to be serving make-up time for AWOL periods at an administrative unit which is known for just that purpose; and instead he's given an honorable discharge never having made up his AWOL time at all, as required by military rules at the time.  Why?  Hmmm, maybe because the most political of all military units is the National Guard?  That is, of course, why it was famous during Vietnam for being the hiding place of the rich and powerful.  Is it because daddy was at the time, first a U.S. Representative from Texas and then later the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N and a Special Envoy to China?  Is it because Nixon was trying to marry W off to his daughter?

  What does an experience like that do to someone who later in life wants to portray himself as being pro-military and gung-ho?  I'd say it makes him dangerously gung-ho.  It leads to severe cognitive dissonance. It leads to chest-thumping, jingoistic behavior that gets good people killed simply because they chose to actually serve.

  Thanks, but no thanks.  I'd rather have someone who actually served his country rather than someone who avoided serving it.  Because of that, I didn't support Clinton; and I'm not about to support Bush. And I'm not the only vet who thinks the same way - http://www.vetsforkerry.com

  And if you really wish to educate yourselves about some of the truly horrific things that Bush is doing to the military and to veterans via his unfunded broken promises and under the table program cuts to support his tax cuts for himself and his rich buddies, like Cheney, then I suggest you visit the following sites:

http://www.vva.org
http://www.vfw.org

you were a Sailor? when and where? what was your job?

[anonymous]

what i find puzzling about scedu is that every guy ive ever known who had to deal with va was convinced the biggest problem was the va itself. never heard a guy blame any president for how screwed up the va is.

[demaw1]

DEAD.................FAITH


    This is rich....You just have to tell me how just how you came up with unshakeable faith......from....me saying.... a little faith



    wmd fiasco....what did rice have to do with that?...
 
     Again....canada,france,england,italy,australia,bulgaria,germany,

  new zealand,israel,jordan,egypt.saudi arabia,russia.iraq.....all said iraq had wmds.

    Every hi profile democrat elected to the congress said saddam had wmd and said he was a danger to america and said that could not stand.....clinton...and all of his cabinet said saddam had wmds and we would have to take him out.

    Russia told bush [just a few days before he gave go order ]their intell had info that obl...2nd in command was going to meet with saddam to discuss hitihg america.


    Now the next time you say bush lied or missed lead about wmd,    You sir will be a lier.

[-dead-]

Originally posted by demaw1
DEAD.................FAITH


    This is rich....You just have to tell me how just how you came up with unshakeable faith......from....me saying.... a little faith



    wmd fiasco....what did rice have to do with that?...
 
     Again....canada,france,england,italy,australia,bulgaria,germany,

  new zealand,israel,jordan,egypt.saudi arabia,russia.iraq.....all said iraq had wmds.

    Every hi profile democrat elected to the congress said saddam had wmd and said he was a danger to america and said that could not stand.....clinton...and all of his cabinet said saddam had wmds and we would have to take him out.

    Russia told bush [just a few days before he gave go order ]their intell had info that obl...2nd in command was going to meet with saddam to discuss hitihg america.


    Now the next time you say bush lied or missed lead about wmd,    You sir will be a lier.

Try the sentence again: "Well your unshaken faith in Dr. Rice's fact-checking capabilities after the Iraqi WMD fiasco is admirable."

Sadly all that intelligence stuff is irrelevant to Dr Rice's fact-checking capabilities. The fact is that there have been no WMDs found. If the intel says there is, but the facts say there isn't, someone didn't check their facts.

Why pick on Rice? What did she have to do with the WMD fiasco? She's National Security Advisor - and the whole big thing about the non-existent Iraqi WMDs was that they were perceived as a threat to national security. So I assume she may have had something to do with advising the president on the WMD issue.

Perhaps her best known fact-check fiasco was the Niger uranium nonsense of which she said: "The president quoted a British paper. We did not know at the time�no one knew at the time, in our circles�maybe someone knew down in the bowels of the agency, but no one in our circles knew that there were doubts and suspicions that this might be a forgery." Pretty much an admission that she doesn't check her facts.

Did I mention Bush? I don't believe I did. But FYI if Bush told people or gave them the impression that Iraq had WMDs when Iraq didn't, it doesn't matter a hoot what the CIA, MI6, the KGB or Nancy Reagan's astrologer told him about the WMDs - he did mislead people. What you seem to be trying to argue is that he didn't mislead people knowingly and deliberately. That's the $64,000 question, the answer to which we'll never know for certain. So that's a subjective opinion thing. But hey, he is a politician: that's already a strike against him on that count.

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by demaw1
Again....canada,france,england,italy,australia,bulgaria,germany,

  new zealand,israel,jordan,egypt.saudi arabia,russia.iraq.....all said iraq had wmds.

        You sir will be a lier. [/B]

hehe... Iraq?

[demaw1]

Dead ...interesting analysis...

     I have no unshaken faith in any human being.
     I have faith in some, little faith in others,and no faith in the rest.

     No wmds found:
   
      1. because we found many fighters underground and well covered ,the number of fighters we thought they had increased.
 Is it more likely someone didnt check their facts....or that humans have not yet evolved the ability to see underground?
      2. Did or did not saddam ever have wmd/did he ever use them?
      3 because we have not found the wmds does that mean they never will be found?
      4 is it possible any were shipped to syria?
   Niger uranium:

      1. it has been reported recently by all british newspapers[right and left]   and I have heard from several places on short wave radio that there might be some truth to that story.
      2, do we have to say for sure right now it all was false?
   
   Subjective opinion verses common sense.
 [fact]  
      1. saddam uses wmd in war and then against his own people.
  [fact]
      2 saddam is striving hard to build wmds
  [fact]
      3.saddom says he has wmd
    [fact]
      4 you are attacked
     [fact]
      5. osama b l says we will hit u with wmd
   
      6.u look around to determin which country most likely to give wmd to him, most would say iraq.
      7. to protect your country,family when would you ge in.

       1 80/20 percent chance he has wmd
       2  60/40
       3  50/50
       4  40/60
       5 20/80
       6 never?
                      Ok with a goofy belifs like these you would not be a lier if you said missed lead.......but if you ever said he lied then yes you would be a liar.

[demaw1]

midnight......

     Yes iraq, saddam said many times him self he had WMDs.

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by demaw1
open letter.
    ...I am not nieve,I as most of you do, know whats going on, but this was real because it is very possible that my 2 sons will be involved soon in this war .

  Most ,but not all democractic leaders and most,  but not all liberals dispise the military.

Well, you may not be naive, but you sure are misinformed.

I spent some time in the USN during the Vietnam era and most chief petty officers were far more liberal than the average bear.

I have no idea who will win the election.  I believe both Kerry & Bush have the best interest of the country at heart.  Based on past history, I have to believe banks will open, companies will operate in the black & etc. regardless of the outcome.

curly

[demaw1]

Curly.....misinformed...

     Misinformed about what?


      It does not surprise me that some with military experiance have views to the left and that is their right.
      Even in ww2 a s in all wars a certian percentage does.

       After a while I had very left views on veitnam but not for the same reason the left did.
       I dont give a darn about banks,storys,books.or anything else.If my sons are involved I want to have hope the president and sec,of defense wont stabb them in the back.

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by demaw1
Curly.....misinformed...

     Misinformed about what?


      It does not surprise me that some with military experiance have views to the left and that is their right.
      Even in ww2 a s in all wars a certian percentage does.

       After a while I had very left views on veitnam but not for the same reason the left did.
       I dont give a darn about banks,storys,books.or anything else.If my sons are involved I want to have hope the president and sec,of defense wont stabb them in the back.

Misinformed about members of the military and their political views.

I understand your concerns about your son and wish them safety and success.  But, the opinions you are expressing concerning Bush/Kerry are out of whack.

Look at Bush's military record.  Listen to him speak and express his ideas.  He is a functional moron (barely.)  Bush is so dumb, he fails to understand many basic ideas of effective government.

On the other hand, I do believe both Bush and Kerry are ok ... I don't think either would deliberately endanger the country.  I can live with either of them being elected.

curly

[RedTop]

Originally posted by anonymous
you were a Sailor? when and where? what was your job?

I'm kind of interested in this answer as well.

[demaw1]

Curly..............misinforme d......

   I am sorry I am still confussed..misinformed about their political veiws during vietnam or now?

   I dont see how my opinions are out of wack, do you have an idea?

   What do you base dumb and moron on?   school..grades..speaches..clo thes etc.

  If you are 51 or over answer this If not just ignore it....
   Do you believe johnson and mc namara endangered the country?

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by demaw1
Curly..............misinformed......

   I am sorry I am still confussed..misinformed about their political veiws during vietnam or now?

You stated Most ,but not all democractic leaders and most, but not all liberals dispise the military.  That is inaccurate.  The military is filled with political liberals, or at least the military was in the late 60s, early 70s.

   I dont see how my opinions are out of wack, do you have an idea?

[/b]

For example, you seem to think Bush really supports the military and yet he chose not to serve on active duty during the vietnam era.  Instead, he selected the national guard and disappeared his last year.  Your belief that Bush will support the military seems out of whack with his past behavior.

   What do you base dumb and moron on?   school..grades..speaches..clo thes etc.

[/b]

His inability to express a single complex thought without convulsing the country with laughter.  Even many republicans refuse to listen to him speak.  Indeed, they will vote Bush in the coming election not because of Bush, but rather because they reflexively vote Republican.

  If you are 51 or over answer this If not just ignore it....

[/b]

Certified old fart here, well past 51.

   Do you believe johnson and mc namara endangered the country?

Oh my yes!  Eisenhower and later JFK eased us into that mess in a advisory capacity, but LBJ, via the Gulf of Tonkin incident, was responsible for the US involvement.  The Gulf of Tonkin, much like Bush's WMDs, was pretty much a fabricated event as a pretext to firing up the machinery of war.

curly

[AWMac]

 SFC
 U.S. Army (Retired)
 1975 - 1995

  Airbourne Recon, Tunnel Rat, Commo/ Security/Intel/MI.

  No Man or Woman prays harder for Peace than those that serve in the Military!

  Free America!  Vote!

 

[demaw1]

Curly.....thanks.....

       Thank you for your reasoned response, believe me you are one of the few, but we do disagree he he.

     Yes you are right in 60s and early 70s there were a fair number of liberals........but a very great many were JFK. liberal....huge differance...Today, those I spoke of do dispise the military.

     Bush and guard........

      Ah  right again...I will try to explain.....

     I believe most upper class people,so to speak, either went into the guard or did nothing.  Bush went into the guard, [a plus]

     He choose flying,  a number of brave men have said: when you jump into the cockpit of a fighter,most wives and girl friends do not realize, the chances of death, have just increased, by at least 35 percent..........he could have been a lawyer.

     He has been a war cic for 2 years now, He has given our men and women everything short of nukes to use. Has not worried about enemy body counts,  when we took a hill we didnt give it back 2..3 times.. didnt send our planes off  with half ord. because might have to much damage.   Nor does he care what france or germany thinks .  I could go on and on.  For someone who cant give great speaches he has done well as cic.

      Somehow you think someone who spent 4 mo. in country, has more experance than bush now?  Someone who has voted against every weapon system now in use,  would support the military now?   Did you ever hear of a place called mogadishu ?I cant even go into it , makes me to sick.   Except for JFK. that was a typical,  democrat presidents,  response since FDR.    No I dont have the disconnect,  and I have so much more to lose. I wish Id known you could bug out after three little wounds.

   Clinton could, and still can give great speaches, I would rather have a president that would have said,   go get our men, use what you need short of nukes, I dont give a damn what the u.n. thinks.    Just useing common sense, the ones who died in somalia, which one would they have chosen? BTW, I know who the ones in iraq would choose.

 WMDs: I just cant go into it again, if you truly believe he lied about that...then so be it.
thanks  demaw.