Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on May 20, 2003, 08:56:41 AM
-
I know many of you have strong feelings on the subject of President Bush's visit to the USS Abraham Lincoln, so I thought you might appreciate CDR McIntyre's letter to Senator Byrd.
"Senator Byrd, As a retired Naval Officer, with two Gulf carrier deployments under my belt, I find your criticism of President Bush's visit to the Lincoln offensive in the extreme! This is the first time that the Commander-in-Chief took time out of his busy wartime schedule to pay a visit to thank those who served in the line of fire, in way that was both dramatic and meaningful to those on the carrier. Perhaps if LBJ got off his fat bellybutton to do something similar, our troops' morale in Vietnam might not have been so low. As a Naval officer, I am extremely sensitive to styles of leadership. That is, after all, our stock in trade. And it was not lost on me that the President spent about thirty seconds shaking hands with the Admiral, CO, and CAG (If you don't know these abbreviations just look them up in your Funk & Wagnalls!). He
then spent the next forty-five minutes putting himself at the disposal of the people who make that ship work, the yellow shirts, the green shirts, the purple shirts, the chiefs, the sailors. If you don't know the significance of those colored shirts, look it up in your Blue Jacket's Manual. Not dressed out in formal uniform (I understand at Bush's request), but in their greasy, smelly, sweaty working uniforms...working a flight deck is hot, hard work. And yet he, in his flight suit, put himself at their disposal, this was their moment for 19 or 20 something year old kids a few years out of high school, to get a picture of themselves with the President of the United States, his arm draped around their shoulder.
That is a moment that those kids never dreamed would ever happen to them, maybe not even when they knew he was coming aboard. Surely, he would see the brass, not the troops. But it was the troops to whom he gave his time... and it was the most natural moment in the world. You might have thought it was a family reunion, and in a way, it was... Bush is one of them, the common man, and while he is still the most powerful man on the planet right now, he hasn't lost his touch for them.
Was it a political moment? What moment of a president's life is NOT a political moment? Was it grand standing, to come in to an OK pass to a 4 wire, a bit high in close, correcting, left of centerline? Well, hell,he didn't fly the approach anyway, though I understand from the pilots who flew him that he did a pretty good job at formation flying, tucked in close for a lead change. You can always tell a fighter pilot, you just can't tell him very much. And apparently after thirty years, it all comes back, with a little coaching, I am sure. Frankly, I would have liked to see him come aboard in an FA-18, but the Secret Service vetoed
that, and Bush accepted their judgment... again, a mark of a good leader.
If you had spent some time in the service, instead of hiding out with the women as a welder in a shipyard during WWII and later, the Klan, you might understand the significance of that moment to all the men and women aboard the Lincoln, and indeed to all the men and women in the service who shared that moment vicariously. But you chose the bedsheet instead of the uniform, and so you don't. I am half-tempted to move to West Virginia just so I could vote against you in your next election.
Lewis F. McIntyre CDR, USN (Ret)
(address and phone editted out by poster)
-
You know what would've sent a stronger message to those crewmen and crewwomen who work like dogs on the flight deck all day? Save the money that was used for the trap landing, and instead give it to the crew as a bonus for a job well done.
Words of encouragement and thanks are nice and all, but when it comes to paying the bills....nothing says "Well done" like a big old bonus.
-
Originally posted by banana
You know what would've sent a stronger message to those crewmen and crewwomen who work like dogs on the flight deck all day? Save the money that was used for the trap landing, and instead give it to the crew as a bonus for a job well done.
Words of encouragement and thanks are nice and all, but when it comes to paying the bills....nothing says "Well done" like a big old bonus.
banana, you have so aptly named yourself that I cannot come up with anything else to say about you other than "You banana!".
-
Originally posted by banana
You know what would've sent a stronger message to those crewmen and crewwomen who work like dogs on the flight deck all day? Save the money that was used for the trap landing, and instead give it to the crew as a bonus for a job well done.
Words of encouragement and thanks are nice and all, but when it comes to paying the bills....nothing says "Well done" like a big old bonus.
Money is good, we all need it. However, many studies have concluded that what you say isn't true. People are more motivated by things other than money. Respect and recognition are more motivating than money.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Money is good, we all need it. However, many studies have concluded that what you say isn't true. People are more motivated by things other than money. Respect and recognition are more motivating than money.
Thats a fact, even our company survey done recently reflects this!
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Thats a fact, even our company survey done recently reflects this!
Maslow identified the following need levels:
Self Actualization
Ego Needs
Social Needs
Security Needs
Body Needs
I'd say the Prez has done just a teeny bit more homework on motivating the troops than Mr. banana!
-
Originally posted by Syzygyone
Maslow identified the following need levels:
Self Actualization
Ego Needs
Social Needs
Security Needs
Body Needs
I'd say the Prez has done just a teeny bit more homework on motivating the troops than Mr. banana!
The "Pyramid" ;)
-
Well if money was the motivation for the crew to enlist with the navy...they sure chose the wrong career.
-
Originally posted by OIO
Well if money was the motivation for the crew to enlist with the navy...they sure chose the wrong career.
LOL! Yeah, a 6-pack of Bud each probably would have been more inspiring, with a note "From the CIC, enjoy!" :D
-
So...anyone wanna place bets as to when this shows up on Snopes?
-
Originally posted by Erlkonig
So...anyone wanna place bets as to when this shows up on Snopes?
You mean he faked the carrier landing??????
-
Originally posted by Erlkonig
So...anyone wanna place bets as to when this shows up on Snopes?
Here, check it out yourself :p
Lewis F. McIntyre CDR, USN (Ret)
14095 Burnt Store Rd Hughesville, MD 20637
301-274-0975
-
So, you guys are saying that the money was better spent on the trap landing than on handing out bonuses to the crew?
I wasn't launching into some pyscho-bable about what motivates the men and women of our armed forces. I merely suggested that the money for the trap landing could've had a more direct positive influence in the form of a bonus for the crew.
-
Originally posted by banana
I merely suggested that the money for the trap landing could've had a more direct positive influence in the form of a bonus for the crew.
And we're suggesting that psychology in theory suggests you may be wrong.:)
-
True banana, but put yourself in the shoes of the crew.
They are in the navy for a reason, and money sure as heck aint it. They've been deployed for months in a war zone and worked their arses off.
When they get home or 10 years after they retire, what do you think they'll enjoy more? A $200 bonus on their paycheck ("You know grandson, I once got a $200 paycheck bonus while I was in the navy!") or meeting the CIC (and you can imagine what they'll be telling their grandkids).
Hey Rip, thats not a bad idea man! submit it to the white house! A 6 pack for everyone deployed :D
-
Rip, IMO, Bush would've made a larger impact in the lives and attitudes of the crew of the TR if he had flown in on a regular old boring chopper, and along with a "WTG" speech, he handed out bonus checks.
I know you're thinking "Damn, banana's right. But I *can't* admit that to his face!".
:D
-
While money is nice, an "atta boy" and pat on the back goes pretty damn far.
Wish my employer submitted to such Freudian thinking
-
When they get home or 10 years after they retire, what do you think they'll enjoy more? A $200 bonus on their paycheck ("You know grandson, I once got a $200 paycheck bonus while I was in the navy!") or meeting the CIC (and you can imagine what they'll be telling their grandkids).
OIO, in my version that old duffer would say "You know grandson, I once met the President of the United States. And instead of blowing the money on a carrier landing to use for his upcoming presidential bid, he commanded that the money be given to the crew as a bonus! What a president!"
LePaul, where did I ever say that the President shouldn't have been there in person? Nowhere! All I'm griping about is his choice of methods on how to get there.
-
Originally posted by banana
Rip, IMO, Bush would've made a larger impact in the lives and attitudes of the crew of the TR if he had flown in on a regular old boring chopper, and along with a "WTG" speech, he handed out bonus checks.
I know you're thinking "Damn, banana's right. But I *can't* admit that to his face!".
:D
Well, I'm no psychologist, but I had 5 courses of psych in college simply because I found it a fascinating subject, and I am here to tell you that your suggestion was *probably* thought about, but overridden for the self-actualization suggestion ;)
But aren't you the same banana that says tax refunds are meaningless?!?! ;)
-
Rip, that is *so* typical of you Reps. Pat the common folks on the head and make them feel good about themselves....while at the same time passing coporate welfare and tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans.
Only problem is, the common folks are not as dumb as you think they are. And they proved it last election by casting more votes for the other candidate.
No worries, though. The gene pool is strong in the Bush family. While GWBush is busy handing out atta boys and nothing much else, the economy sinks ever lower. History will repeat itself, and we'll be greeting the new Democratic president into the white house in Jan. 2005.
-
He couldn't have given only the crew of the carrier the money and if the cost of the visit were spread around to all military personnel we're talking what, a buck apiece?
I'm kinda enjoying this particular attack against the pres, shows how small minded some folks really are.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
He couldn't have given only the crew of the carrier the money and if the cost of the visit were spread around to all military personnel we're talking what, a buck apiece?
I'm kinda enjoying this particular attack against the pres, shows how small minded some folks really are.
Yes, I am small minded. I think of the small person, the underpriveleged, the little guy.
On the whole, I can think of worse things to be called.
-
Originally posted by banana
Yes, I am small minded. I think of the small person, the underpriveleged, the little guy.
On the whole, I can think of worse things to be called.
I think most military members would resent being called underprivileged. I know I would have.
-
Originally posted by banana
Rip, that is *so* typical of you Reps. Pat the common folks on the head and make them feel good about themselves....while at the same time passing coporate welfare and tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans.
Only problem is, the common folks are not as dumb as you think they are. And they proved it last election by casting more votes for the other candidate.
No worries, though. The gene pool is strong in the Bush family. While GWBush is busy handing out atta boys and nothing much else, the economy sinks ever lower. History will repeat itself, and we'll be greeting the new Democratic president into the white house in Jan. 2005.
Talk about falling short and wide of the debate! Whew! Too much to cover there for a post about inspiration to the Military that this thread was about. :)
By the way, "you Reps"...I have voted for a Democrat recently, still think I'm a card carrying Republican? ;) Think again. :D
-
By the way, "you Reps"...I have voted for a Democrat recently, still think I'm a card carrying Republican? Think again.
Well, you sure sound like one today! :)
-
Unlike you, I vote the issues, not the party. :D
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Unlike you, I vote the issues, not the party. :D
That is so untrue that I can't believe you said that!
Just for that remark, I'm gonna send you a Phyllis Diller wig and will insist you wear it at next year's con! ;)
-
Originally posted by banana
That is so untrue that I can't believe you said that!
Just for that remark, I'm gonna send you a Phyllis Diller wig and will insist you wear it at next year's con! ;)
Noooooooooooooooo!
-
I'm no Byrd fan, but his work in the ship yards helped his generation's war effort tons more than Dubya's joy riding (at tax payers' expense) in the "Champagne Air Force" did ours.
If ol' Slick had been the one to grab the trap, y'all right wing lemmings would be on him like chickens on a june bug.
What a load o' crap.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
If ol' Slick had been the one to grab the trap, y'all right wing lemmings would be on him like chickens on a june bug.
Little chance of that when "ol' Slick" couldn't find the time to visit even once Little Rock AFB, less than 20 miles from the State Capitol, during his 8 years as Governor.
-
Gronk, the debate was whether this was inspirational to the crew, whether you like Bush or not, it *was* inspirational, and the cost can't be measured in a dollar amount for what it did for the US Navy... and Byrd's envy of such a position was evident.
-
banana you simply have no idea what you are talking about.
First of all you have no idea about management and leadership. Anyone with a background in the field will tell you that intrinsic rewards like attention and recognition from a credible leader are far more powerful and practical rewards than extra pay - I know you dont understand that but the evidence to that is consitent in management studies again and again, so I really wont waste any more time trying to argue that point with you - you are simply flat out wrong.
Second, baring the absoulte impracticality of just giving bonuses to a single CVN crew is there any doubt that if he had done that just that you or one of your kind would now be crying how bush was wasting money and making a symbolic insignificant pandering and patronizing gesture by paying these brave men an women a small amount of money like some tribal chief of old.
And thats ecactly how the crew would percieve it, again the management literature is pretty solid on this - people dont just want insignificant little money gestures, they want personal recognition, individua attention, fun, exciting celebration events, ceremonies and a feeling that their leaders understand what they are going through and share in their experiences in some part - that is exactly what Bush did in his vistit and the viking landing. That was brilliant piece of leadership and inspiration on his part.
-
yes, clinton didn't waste taxpayers money on "trap' landings , he just let hillary use the govt's 747 (air force one) to fly between DC and NY many times in her campagn for senator.
sen byrd has no room to talk about wasting tax money, he is known as "senator pork barrel"
-
Originally posted by john9001
yes, clinton didn't waste taxpayers money on "trap' landings , he just let hillary use the govt's 747 (air force one) to fly between DC and NY many times in her campagn for senator.
Now that's the kind of money that even spread around those GIs would appreciate.
Wonder why ole Wizard Byrd missed this opportunity to look out for our financial interests?
-
Originally posted by banana
So, you guys are saying that the money was better spent on the trap landing than on handing out bonuses to the crew?
I wasn't launching into some pyscho-bable about what motivates the men and women of our armed forces. I merely suggested that the money for the trap landing could've had a more direct positive influence in the form of a bonus for the crew.
Apparently you missed my post about the actual cost of that landing, from the perspective of a carrier pilot. I must say I'll take the opinion of a person with personal experience first.
-
Where do you guys keep getting the idea that a whole lot of money was wasted by a "trap" landing? It total crap invented by the media.
What do you THINK a carrier is suppose to do, and what it does every single day that it is at sea. Peacetime or at War. Its constantly launching and retrieving aircraft, 24 hours a day.
Military pilots constantly go up and burn JP-4 by flying in circles and doing touch and goes, and in the Navy, traps. Its because they are required to have XXX hours of flight time per year (and under different conditions) and so many landings/takeoffs to maintain they're qualifications.
Ok, lets say he rode a helicopter in to the CV. That just means that at a different time, the very same pilot that flew him in, would have had to do an extra training flight to stay current. Same number of flight hours and same number of cats & traps.
Its all politics, but this story of "wasted money" is total bullpuckey. And the sense of recognition of achievement of all those men on the carrier.... priceless. Yes its a cliche, but very true in this case.
-
just another deserter with connections.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Gronk, the debate was whether this was inspirational to the crew, whether you like Bush or not, it *was* inspirational, and the cost can't be measured in a dollar amount for what it did for the US Navy... and Byrd's envy of such a position was evident.
The original post contained the entire letter of the cap'n. Therein he attacks Byrd's war record, or lack thereof. What could be more contiguous to the conversation than to contrast that to Dubya's?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Little chance of that when "ol' Slick" couldn't find the time to visit even once Little Rock AFB, less than 20 miles from the State Capitol, during his 8 years as Governor.
I'd reply, but ol' Rip thinks we're going off-topic from the rest of the thread.
-
Nah, go ahead, I was just replying to the debate of the cost that transpired. thats all.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
I'm no Byrd fan, but his work in the ship yards helped his generation's war effort tons more than Dubya's joy riding (at tax payers' expense) in the "Champagne Air Force" did ours.
If ol' Slick had been the one to grab the trap, y'all right wing lemmings would be on him like chickens on a june bug.
What a load o' crap.
Like the left-wing lemmings were all over Bush? I'm sorry Gronk, but I've just got to disagree strongly with your view on this. There's on old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China." Clinton would never have thought to do this, becaues he wasn't about leadership, at least not leadership of people. He neither understand or respected us in uniform, and his disdain was well recognized by all. However, had he tried a similar "stunt", I'm inclined to believe the military would have assumed it to be exactly what Byrd tried to claim Bush's "trap" was, i.e. a pubilicity stunt for the coming election (remember a fellow named Ducacus, in the M1A1?). The controversy over Bush's military record asside, most in uniform today believe he honors and respects them. This only cemented that image in their minds.
Back in WWII, Admiral "Bull" Halsey was the first admiral to get carrier qualified, and the only one who did so before the war even started. It wasn't required. Indeed, all the other admirals were big-gun surface admirals, and thought Bull was a bit off his rocker for wasting the time. He did it anyway, because he knew that the future of the Navy was the carrier, and to be the most effective carrier admiral, to lead naval airmen, he needed to be one of them. Bush was following that tradition when he elected to share a bit of the danger they face every day aboard the Abe Lincoln. And the crew, the entire US military, accepted it, revelled in it. A helo ride would have cost about the same, but would never have had the same impact. The primary reason most dems are so upset about this is they know they could never have pulled this off. Clinton visited several carriers in his time, so it's not the trip to the AL that's got their goat. It's the fact that he looks too much like a leader in that flight suit. Maybe that's because he IS a leader.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
I'd reply, but ol' Rip thinks we're going off-topic from the rest of the thread.
Very convenient.
-
"It's the fact that he looks too much like a leader in that flight suit. Maybe that's because he IS a leader."
or they resent a coke head deserter playing ceasar.
-
Yes thats it, they all obviously hate him... :rolleyes:
Hell why dont you bother to ask some of AH very own Iraq and Afghanistan vets about their opinions of their CIC and his leadership? Wouldn't that be revolutionary?
-
Originally posted by Sabre
Like the left-wing lemmings were all over Bush? I'm sorry Gronk, but I've just got to disagree strongly with your view on this. There's on old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China." Clinton would never have thought to do this, becaues he wasn't about leadership, at least not leadership of people. He neither understand or respected us in uniform, and his disdain was well recognized by all. However, had he tried a similar "stunt", I'm inclined to believe the military would have assumed it to be exactly what Byrd tried to claim Bush's "trap" was, i.e. a pubilicity stunt for the coming election (remember a fellow named Ducacus, in the M1A1?). The controversy over Bush's military record asside, most in uniform today believe he honors and respects them. This only cemented that image in their minds.
Back in WWII, Admiral "Bull" Halsey was the first admiral to get carrier qualified, and the only one who did so before the war even started. It wasn't required. Indeed, all the other admirals were big-gun surface admirals, and thought Bull was a bit off his rocker for wasting the time. He did it anyway, because he knew that the future of the Navy was the carrier, and to be the most effective carrier admiral, to lead naval airmen, he needed to be one of them. Bush was following that tradition when he elected to share a bit of the danger they face every day aboard the Abe Lincoln. And the crew, the entire US military, accepted it, revelled in it. A helo ride would have cost about the same, but would never have had the same impact. The primary reason most dems are so upset about this is they know they could never have pulled this off. Clinton visited several carriers in his time, so it's not the trip to the AL that's got their goat. It's the fact that he looks too much like a leader in that flight suit. Maybe that's because he IS a leader.
Yes, he looks quite the leader. As did Saddam Hussein and Adolph Hitler in their military finery. But where is he leading us to? It's clear that stirring the pot in the mideast enables him to increase his hold on the reins of power, and it certainly helps to have the military on your side if you plan on expanding that power globally. Let me make this perfectly clear. I don't trust presidents. Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., no matter who. They're all politicians out for the power. Lemmings, both on the right and left, normally keep them in control. The WTC disaster has given this particular president way too much power. So much so that it has knocked me off the fence (you know, the one down the middle of the road) on the left side. At the air show this weekend (didn't see ya there, sorry if you couldn't make it!) the national anthem was accompanied by the largest American flag ever suspended from a sky-diver, over 200 square feet. I shed alligator tears for the WTC victims, our valiant troops who are in harm's way, and for the future of our country under an executive that put them there for reasons I suspect had more to do with his power acquisition than a just cause.
I know and respect you, but we'll just have to agree to disagree on this subject. If it helps, know that I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
GronK
-
"I suspect had more to do with his power acquisition than a just cause."
Power? Whats he gonna do with all that power when he is out of office in 5 1/2 years?
-
Coke head deserter?
Vader, you're an liar and a fool. Maybe you can be the next Iraqi information minister, you seem very qualified.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Yes thats it, they all obviously hate him... :rolleyes:
Hell why dont you bother to ask some of AH very own Iraq and Afghanistan vets about their opinions of their CIC and his leadership? Wouldn't that be revolutionary?
The vets have already posted their opinions. Arfann would rather just ignore them. It's easier to claim you are right without a silly little thing like the truth getting in the way.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
"I suspect had more to do with his power acquisition than a just cause."
Power? Whats he gonna do with all that power when he is out of office in 5 1/2 years?
The question is, "What will he do with all this power during the next 1 1/2 years?"
-
Ok, what is worrying you so much in the next 1.5 years up until the next election?
-
Hey, no problem, Gronk. We've been friends for years, and I respect your opinion...I just don't agree with you on all things. It's cool. is a vet, just not of either Gulf War. It's why I respect him while still disagreeing with him.>
Gronk, I'm not inclined to offer unconditional trust to anyone, most especially politicians. However, and in case you haven't noticed, the power you're worried about Bush miss-using was not enough to get more than half the tax cut package he was pushing for. It was enough to push Syria to be more cooperative on the war on terror, though how deep that cooperation goes has yet to be determined. I have to consider the possibility that you've fallen victim to the efforts or the right to demonize our President.
I have great faith in the checks and balances built into our nation's structure of government. I also think comparing President Bush to Hitler, and Saddam is unfair. You know as well as I that such gear as the President wore on that flight is required safety gear for that aircraft. He wore no rank, either. It was a masterful PR event, no doubt about it. But it was in charactor with the image most in the military today hold of him; genuine, with real affection and respect for those who serve their country. To the guys and gals on the CV, it was worth more than a few extra bucks in their pockets. At least that's my take. So don't be reactionary, running to the left simply because you fear our President's power. Be wary, but don't rush to conclusions.
Ask yourself, what new real power does this President have that the last one didn't, or the one before that? Is it really more power, or just more determination? When Japan attacked us in 1941, Roosevelt was given waaaay more sweeping powers than President Bush has today. Respectfully, I think you're being reactionary, perhaps allowing a preformed opinion to cloud your preception. Of course, I might be suffering from the same condition, but for the most part President Bush has pursued international and domestic policies in line with my own political views...for the most part.
Respectfully,
Sabre
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Very convenient.
Isn't it though? Wellll. Not living in Arkansas or being in the Air Force, how could I possibly know and why should I care that President Clinton never visited that AFB? If it hurt you, personally, so much I suggest you send him a personal email expressing how much you missed seeing him. (assuming you were either at that base or a resident of Arkansas or????)
-
Originally posted by Martlet
The vets have already posted their opinions. Arfann would rather just ignore them. It's easier to claim you are right without a silly little thing like the truth getting in the way.
Oy, Martlett strikes again!
First, please read and follow the thread before posting. In this case, ldv made a comment, Groinhurts responded to it, and you responded to him regarding . . . . . . me?
As much as I appreciate your efforts to read my mind and let folks know what I would or would rather not do, your accuracy leaves much to be desired. In future, let me know when you are going to attempt this and I'll remove the tin foil hat so you will come at least somewhat near the mark.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
Oy, Martlett strikes again!
First, please read and follow the thread before posting. In this case, ldv made a comment, Groinhurts responded to it, and you responded to him regarding . . . . . . me?
As much as I appreciate your efforts to read my mind and let folks know what I would or would rather not do, your accuracy leaves much to be desired. In future, let me know when you are going to attempt this and I'll remove the tin foil hat so you will come at least somewhat near the mark.
I suggest you follow your own advice. The truth shall set you free!
-
Originally posted by Sabre
I have great faith in the checks and balances built into our nation's structure of government. I also think comparing President Bush to Hitler, and Saddam is unfair. So don't be reactionary, running to the left simply because you fear our President's power. Be wary, but don't rush to conclusions.
Ask yourself, what new real power does this President have that the last one didn't, or the one before that? Is it really more power, or just more determination? When Japan attacked us in 1941, Roosevelt was given waaaay more sweeping powers than President Bush has today. Respectfully, I think you're being reactionary, perhaps allowing a preformed opinion to cloud your preception. Of course, I might be suffering from the same condition, but for the most part President Bush has pursued international and domestic policies in line with my own political views...for the most part.
Respectfully,
Sabre
The following is a much quoted statement by another famous character of WW2. It states pretty clearly what I feel are the underlying reasons for Bush's actions.
"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY."
--Goering at the Nuremberg Trials
-
TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED
Yes Bush really had to tell me... Sorry arfann but that quote is stupid when used in the context of today. Its the same if you used it to denounces americas entery into WW2 after the pearl harbor attack.
(http://www.wfa.org/images/wtc.gif)
-
Originally posted by Martlet
I suggest you follow your own advice. The truth shall set you free!
Just to show I'm paying attention, I did go back and follow the thread. Still looks like you blew it or, at best, Groinhurts was not clear enough regarding who he was replying to. Simple enough, you and Groiny sort it out.
-
Leave me out of this, its between the two of you - figure it out yourselves...
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED
Yes Bush really had to tell me... Sorry arfann but that quote is stupid when used in the context of today. Its the same if you used it to denounces americas entery into WW2 after the pearl harbor attack.
Showing conclusively that you've been sucked in like the rest. 9-11 certainly was justification to go after Al Qaeda and the Afghani government that protected him. Hell, it would even validate invading Saudi Arabia, where most of the perps came from. Our neighbor Canada has been safe haven for some who attempted to do us harm. But not Iraq. Again I say "BUT NOT IRAQ!!" So you say Hussein was (is?) a tyrant who murdered his own people? Sure, but there are many of the same ilk all over the world. Not our problem. The infamous WMD? None found yet, and how about Israel, Pakistan, and India. Shall we invade them next?
You may now return to the Rush Wannabe vituperation class.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Leave me out of this, its between the two of you - figure it out yourselves...
You can't talk to my buddy like that!! Get him, Martie!!
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Its the same if you used it to denounces americas entery into WW2 after the pearl harbor attack.
[[/IMG]
Yep. That's why, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor we immediately declared war on China.
-
Gscholz:
Then why could FDR just say we were under attack by germany, declare the pacifits unpatriotic, and go off to war before pearl harbor - rememer it works the same in any country...
Arfann:
No, but we also didnt turn down germany's declaration of war either.... We are taking care of business, plain and simple and saddam was one of our enemies and allied with al-qaeda in wishing destruction on the USA...
The fact is that the goering quote does not work here- nobody except the terrorists had to tell the american people that we were under attack.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
Yep. That's why, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor we immediately declared war on China.
Now I understand your views. You just really aren't that bright. That isn't an insult, many people aren't that bright. They just need things explained to them better. I'll try to help.
See, the US was attacked by a terrorist organization. They don't have a country, and are made up of various races. We declared war against terrorism. Since terrorists aren't geospecific, we attack where they are, and the governments that support them. The Taliban supported Al Queda, so we attacked them.
Iraq was a seperate issue. It just so happened that they had terrorists there, and that the Iraqi gov't supported them, so interests overlapped.
I hope that helps you out.
-
banana I understand your point, but I have to agree with everyone else.
I can think of times on deployment that I would have wiped my bellybutton with a hundred dollar bill, but cut a man's throat for a can of beer.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
Isn't it though? Wellll. Not living in Arkansas or being in the Air Force, how could I possibly know and why should I care that President Clinton never visited that AFB? If it hurt you, personally, so much I suggest you send him a personal email expressing how much you missed seeing him. (assuming you were either at that base or a resident of Arkansas or????)
Hurt me? Nothing that slime ball did hurt me in the way you suggest. Hurt the country? Damn right, in oh so many ways.
Yeah, I spent a couple years at that base, retired from there. Learned of his lack of support from a few that had been there a long time.
Guess I will always hold in contempt those that grovel at his feet.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Now I understand your views. You just really aren't that bright. That isn't an insult, many people aren't that bright. They just need things explained to them better. I'll try to help.
See, the US was attacked by a terrorist organization. They don't have a country, and are made up of various races. We declared war against terrorism. Since terrorists aren't geospecific, we attack where they are, and the governments that support them. The Taliban supported Al Queda, so we attacked them.
Iraq was a seperate issue. It just so happened that they had terrorists there, and that the Iraqi gov't supported them, so interests overlapped.
I hope that helps you out.
OMG, I been figured out! I'm not that bright! Oh, woe is me! So please, please explain to poor pitiful me what "separate issue" is defined by the fiery WTC pic Grunhilda posted. Man, you guys gettin' tangled up in yer tutus with all the fancy footwork.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Hurt me? Nothing that slime ball did hurt me in the way you suggest. Hurt the country? Damn right, in oh so many ways.
Yeah, I spent a couple years at that base, retired from there. Learned of his lack of support from a few that had been there a long time.
Guess I will always hold in contempt those that grovel at his feet.
Grovel? At his feet? Hmmm. Must have missed something. Probably couldn't see the grovellers for all the whiny dogs snapping at his heels. Couldn't get a tooth in him either. That's gotta leave psychological scars.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
The fact is that the goering quote does not work here- nobody except the terrorists had to tell the american people that we were under attack.
But, obviously, not by Iraq. Any ties between Saddam and Osama were (are) tenuous if not totally imaginary until our invasion possibly drove them together. Way to go Dubya!
-
Originally posted by Arfann
OMG, I been figured out! I'm not that bright! Oh, woe is me! So please, please explain to poor pitiful me what "separate issue" is defined by the fiery WTC pic Grunhilda posted. Man, you guys gettin' tangled up in yer tutus with all the fancy footwork.
You can't even follow your own conversation. Perhaps senility is setting in.
-
LOL Martlet, Arfann is just a "post potato" just posting to post.
:D
-
Originally posted by AWMac
LOL Martlet, Arfann is just a "post potato" just posting to post.
:D
Well, is he Arfann or is he Gronk?
-
Just how many Bases did Bush visit as Texas Governor?:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Syzygyone
Well, is he Arfann or is he Gronk?
Let's see. The user name is Arfann. The posts are signed GronK. Hmmm. Nope. Hopeless. Being senile and all, I just can't figure it out. Let me know if you do.
-
Originally posted by AWMac
LOL Martlet, Arfann is just a "post potato" just posting to post.
:D
I didn't post that potato! Well I was gonna but being senile and all I . . . . . . . . .err. . . . . . . ah . . . . . . . . What was the question?
-
Originally posted by Arfann
Showing conclusively that you've been sucked in like the rest. 9-11 certainly was justification to go after Al Qaeda and the Afghani government that protected him. Hell, it would even validate invading Saudi Arabia, where most of the perps came from. Our neighbor Canada has been safe haven for some who attempted to do us harm. But not Iraq. Again I say "BUT NOT IRAQ!!" So you say Hussein was (is?) a tyrant who murdered his own people? Sure, but there are many of the same ilk all over the world. Not our problem. The infamous WMD? None found yet, and how about Israel, Pakistan, and India. Shall we invade them next?
You may now return to the Rush Wannabe vituperation class.
Incidently, though I'm not exactly wild about Bush, I *do* support the CIC when we're in a war. To answer your question of "was it worth it"...maybe we should ask the relatives of these poor souls?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5944-679716,00.html
We went into Germany to take Hitler out of power, and found his mass graves and the ovens....the similiarity of Iraq is ironic (And yes, Saddam studied Hitler and Stalin very thoroughly, he was well rehearsed and schooled on them)
Gronk, will *you* be one of those in 20 years that say none of the genocide ever happened, for simple subborn political beliefs you carry? :(
-
Right to the Point Rip!
:D
-
Originally posted by Arfann
Grovel? At his feet? Hmmm. Must have missed something. Probably couldn't see the grovellers for all the whiny dogs snapping at his heels. Couldn't get a tooth in him either. That's gotta leave psychological scars.
You mean besides impeaching the bastard?
Originally posted by rpm371
Just how many Bases did Bush visit as Texas Governor?
I dunno, tell me that he didn't visit any and I'll check.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
Let's see. The user name is Arfann. The posts are signed GronK. Hmmm. Nope. Hopeless. Being senile and all, I just can't figure it out. Let me know if you do.
Hmm, okay then I will refer to you as ArfannGronK, or would you prefer GronKArfann?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Incidently, though I'm not exactly wild about Bush, I *do* support the CIC when we're in a war. To answer your question of "was it worth it"...maybe we should ask the relatives of these poor souls?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5944-679716,00.html
We went into Germany to take Hitler out of power, and found his mass graves and the ovens....the similiarity of Iraq is ironic (And yes, Saddam studied Hitler and Stalin very thoroughly, he was well rehearsed and schooled on them)
Gronk, will *you* be one of those in 20 years that say none of the genocide ever happened, for simple subborn political beliefs you carry? :(
First, I don't remembering asking "Was it worth it?" , but we will only know the answer to that question in 20 years after all the ramifications are available to view. I've stated for all to see that I don't doubt that Saddam has committed murder, mayhem and, yes, genocide on his people. Much the same as many have done around the world. In places we have no stake in. Is it our place to single handedly and selectively right all those wrongs? I don't think so.
-
Originally posted by Syzygyone
Hmm, okay then I will refer to you as ArfannGronK, or would you prefer GronKArfann?
You can call me GronK or you can call me Arfann or you can call me Grarfann or you can call me Argronk or you can call me Grannk or you can call me Arfronk. But ya doesn't have to call me Mr. Johnson!!
-
Originally posted by AKIron
You mean besides impeaching the bastard?
Oh, that had to hurt. Probably upped the ante on his speaking engagements a coupla thou by doing that.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
Oh, that had to hurt. Probably upped the ante on his speaking engagements a coupla thou by doing that.
Sad thing is you're probably right. He hurt us all but Gore and the rest of you dems are the ones picking up the bulk of the tab for his antics.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Sad thing is you're probably right. He hurt us all but Gore and the rest of you dems are the ones picking up the bulk of the tab for his antics.
Us Dems? Hmmm. Stayed on the fence so long I nearly reverted back to the old "issue rather than party line" argument. Us Dems? Kinda rolls off the tongue, don't it. I think I like it! Thought I was just coming to visit, but I just may make it an extended stay.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
Thought I was just coming to visit, but I just may make it an extended stay.
Yeah Groannko'fano'mine!
Like you got any place else to go!
:D :cool: :cool: :D
-
Originally posted by Syzygyone
Yeah Groannko'fano'mine!
Like you got any place else to go!
:D :cool: :cool: :D
Well, Sissy_gynophobe, (look that up in yer funk and wagnalls) I can go just about anywhere I want, can't I? At least 'til Dubya and the boys make disagreeing with him legally the act of a traitor. Should be any day now, I figure. Oh well, Lazs is flattening my town any day now, so Guantanamo might be a nice place to live for a few decades.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Ok, what is worrying you so much in the next 1.5 years up until the next election?
1.5 years? Oh nooooooooo. Oh. . . . .. . . . . .sorry .. . . . . . . .must be senile. I thought you said erection.
-
Originally posted by Arfann
Well, Sissy_gynophobe,
Garfnannobleolopolis:
Please don't use vowels when attempting to address me. I eschew vowels as my signature implies. Vowels are simply symbolic of left wing minority rule concepts where 5 or 6 letters get to control what the ubermajority other 20 or 21 conserv.... er..uh ... consonants have to say.
:D :D :D
-
Originally posted by Syzygyone
Garfnannobleolopolis:
Please don't use vowels when attempting to address me. I eschew vowels as my signature implies. Vowels are simply symbolic of left wing minority rule concepts where 5 or 6 letters get to control what the ubermajority other 20 or 21 conserv.... er..uh ... consonants have to say.
:D :D :D
Silly person, yer old enough to address yerself. And be sure to eschew them vowels at least 20 times before swallowing. You do swallow, right?
-
Originally posted by Arfann
eschew them vowels at least 20 times before swallowing. You do swallow, right?
Sorry, Garafalo, I don't play for that team!
But, why do you ask?:D
-
. Perhaps if LBJ got off his fat bellybutton to do something similar, our troops' morale in Vietnam might not have been so low.
VP Johnson in Vietnam
(http://www.picturehistory.com/images/products/1/2/7/prod_12760.jpg)
President Lyndon Johnson awards a medal to a wounded U.S. serviceman in Cam Rahn Bay, South Vietnam, October 26, 1966.
(http://www.archives.gov/media_desk/press_kits/picturing_the_century_photo_gallery/lbj_serviceman_cam_rahn_bay_vietnam.gif)
Did I miss Dubya's visit to Iraq?
-
Originally posted by Syzygyone
Sorry, Garafalo, I don't play for that team!
But, why do you ask?:D
Slick wants to know!
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Did I miss Dubya's visit to Iraq?
When he does make it over there you gonna tell yer buddies to stop whining about the cost of the trip?
-
I never once mentioned the cost of the trip... hell if I were CIC I'd make-em give me a ride in all the cool stuff.
I just wanted to point out that the opening letter in this here thread is (or contains) BS.