Bush's Air Guard Record is Legitimate

[Typhoon1244]

Wow, you equate fleeing the country to evade the draft the 'exact same thing' as entering the Air National Guard.

That ain't what I said, bucko. Everybody's upset that Clinton didn't do his duty in Vietnam. Bush didn't either...unless he took part in some secret mission we haven't heard about.

I guess my dad evaded the 'real' military service by being an enlisted officer in the Guard for the past 35 years.

Was your grandfather a politician who used his influence to get your dad that N.G. slot? If the answer is "no," then we're not talking about the same thing.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Re: Cannot sit idly by.

Typhoon, as a reservist, I find your remarks inflammatory and infuriating. You have lost all credibility in this argument. How is flying fighters for the guard and fleeing your country to protest on foreign soil the exact same thing?

Hold on now. Don't put words in my mouth.

We're talking about avoiding service in Vietnam. That seems to be what everyone's upset about.

Clinton avoided Vietnam by running away. Bush avoided Vietnam because his family used their influence to secure a N.G. slot. Ditto for Quayle. If you ask me, they're the ones who've soiled the reputations of guardsmen and reservists everywhere!

It's a question of motive: if it never occured to Bush that he might avoid the Mekong Delta by joining the Guard, then he did an honorable thing...but I don't think that's likely, do you?

 

[merikeyegro]

...

Because the commanding officer that they interviewed was in charge of over a thousand people on that base. It would be pretty hard for him to notice one officer, particularly then when President Bush, was nothing more than 1LT Bush, another testosterone driven fighter pilot under his command.

That would be a good point, of course, if the testosterone-driven fighter pilot weren't the son of a particularly prominent congressman from a wealthy oil family. I'm sure he knew exactly who was being assigned to his squadron. If Jenna Bush were your employee and you were an executive at Disney, there is a good chance you would know exactly where she works and for whom. This is not a particularly strong argument for his service.

Might I also add that the person who came forward to vouch for GWB's service spoke of his service in 1970-71. That is not in question. In question is his service during 1972-73. The general did not attest to this time period. So, his voucher means nothing to the argument, just that GWB served. No one doubts that. Records prove it. Heck, I think the GWB's a liar, but I'll believe him if he tells me about his service in the Guard during that period.

Those in the military - there is a big difference between support and wisdom. I'm sure GWB supports you left and right. Heck, I'm not aware of too many people in this country that don't appreciate their military and give those who serve their deserved support. I, for one, have the utmost respect for those that serve. You're better people than I am. However, the wisdom of the CIC to send his men and women into needless combat only to have a good number return in a bag (and to blow our needed $$$) has to be questioned. No one in this country likes to see people die while serving. GWB has been reckless with the bombs and guns since we kicked the crap out of the Taliban (which, by the way, was a great, measured response - you and he both had my full support). I don't like that. It kills people, teaches no one a real good lesson, pisses off the world, makes us LESS safe, and promotes terrorism (see: al Qaeda now in Iraq, where they weren't before). I guess I just don't see the wisdom. Maybe I'm just a nutty, tree-hugging hippie. Something tells me I'm not. I just don't like being bilked of my cash and having to look over my shoulder when I travel.

Come home already and protect the homeland. We need you more here.

 

[Dragonbravo]

How can doing service stateside be considered 'ducking' Vietnam? Bush flew interceptors. Keep in mind that during that time frame the Soviet Union had a large number of long range bombers armed with nuclear weapons, and flight plans that lead to the USA. So while John Kerry was busy defending the country, George Bush was busy...defending the country. How about all those active duty members that defended the country by being assigned to sit in Germany and stare at a superior number of Soviet tanks? Did they too 'duck' service in Vietnam? Kerry got shot at and Bush didn't. And thank God Bush didn't, because the bullets pointed his way had much more serious ramifications.

So 20 years from now, when ex-guard member so&so runs for office. And it turns out that his unit was never activated for Afghanistan or Iraq, will he be discredited for having 'ducked' the war on terrorism? Will Micheal Eisner, 20 years from now, know where little mandy ponytail worked in the park and how many days she missed work? This whole argument just seems pretty lame.

 

[CA1900]

So 20 years from now, when ex-guard member so&so runs for office. And it turns out that his unit was never activated for Afghanistan or Iraq, will he be discredited for having 'ducked' the war on terrorism?

Since we're not drafting kids to go to Afghanistan, I rather think not.

 

[CatYaaak]

Re: Re: Cannot sit idly by.

Hold on now. Don't put words in my mouth.

We're talking about avoiding service in Vietnam. That seems to be what everyone's upset about.

Clinton avoided Vietnam by running away. Bush avoided Vietnam because his family used their influence to secure a N.G. slot. Ditto for Quayle. If you ask me, they're the ones who've soiled the reputations of guardsmen and reservists everywhere!

It's a question of motive: if it never occured to Bush that he might avoid the Mekong Delta by joining the Guard, then he did an honorable thing...but I don't think that's likely, do you?

Whoa....pretty lame of you, trying to assign to others this make-believe notion of YOURS that service in Vietnam "seems to be what everyone is upset about", or is the barometer for determining if one's a draft-dodger. Talk about a weak attempt to place some sort of equivalency between Bush, Quayle, and Clinton. If indeed "service in Vietnam" is your yardstick (and it certainly isn't anyone else's), then patrolling the DMZ in Korea, manning a tank in West Germany, or flying off a carrier on a Med cruise during that era also means you're a "draft-dodger" too. Sorry, but thankfully most people understand how serving your country is defined; wearing the uniform and being honorably disharged, which both Quayle and Bush did and were.

Of course, during this time and by your way of....um...thinking...a B-52 pilot stationed in Britain was doing "exactly the same thing" as Clinton was just down the road at Oxford as he organized and actively protested his own country on that same foreign soil. And let's not forget those other "draft-dodgers"...those Navy avoiding-service-in-Vietnam submariners who obviously knew they'd never have to take their boomers up the Mekong River.

Most laughable is the very foundation of what your view seems to be...that being in the Guard is somehow a safe haven. World events can't be predicted into next week, let alone for the length of a term of service, and Guard units are always subject to activation and can be sent where needed. Today's "safe haven" can be tomorrow's front line unit depending on who's invading which country and everybody but you seems to know this.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Re: Re: Re: Cannot sit idly by.

Whoa....pretty lame of you, trying to assign to others this make-believe notion of YOURS that service in Vietnam "seems to be what everyone is upset about", or is the barometer for determining if one's a draft-dodger.

Well, I can't take credit for it. I'm just repeating the garbage I hear from my more conservative friends and neighbors: "how can Clinton be Commander-in-Chief when he's never served in combat?"

If indeed "service in Vietnam" is your yardstick (and it certainly isn't anyone else's)...

Hogwash.

Sorry, but thankfully most people understand how serving your country is defined...

More hogwash.

Of course, during this time and by your way of....um...thinking...a B-52 pilot stationed in Britain was doing "exactly the same thing" as Clinton was just down the road at Oxford as he organized and actively protested his own country on that same foreign soil.

That was almost a logical argument. Are you telling me that orbiting a few miles outside Soviet airspace--well within range of missiles and interceptors--waiting for the "go" is just as cozy and safe as ANG duty in south Texas?

Most laughable is the very foundation of what your view seems to be...that being in the Guard is somehow a safe haven. World events can't be predicted into next week, let alone for the length of a term of service, and Guard units are always subject to activation and can be sent where needed. Today's "safe haven" can be tomorrow's front line unit depending on who's invading which country and everybody but you seems to know this.

"Everybody but me seems to know this," huh? I know it all too well, my friend...but I'm not going to get into it here.

True. Guard duty won't necessarily keep your buns out of the fire. But it sure worked for Bush and Quayle, didn't it? Would you say Quayle's service record is just as honorable as, say, John McCain's?

The fact that these men used their families' power and influence to secure their positions...if I were a reservist, I'd find that offensive.

When it comes right down to it, the whole discussion is moot. The voters aren't going to be thinking about Vietnam or the National Guard when Election Day rolls around. They'll look at the economy, and they'll make their decision. Barring a major economic down-turn, I think Bush has got this election sewn up because the Democrats are stumbling in circles.

By the way, I've managed to get through this thread without personally insulting anyone intentionally. I haven't said things like "you make me sick," "pretty lame of you," etc. Why are FlightInfo conservatives incapable of the same level of courtesy?

 

[AlphEcho]

Sorry, Democrats. Read this...

Can this FINALLY prove who's really lying about all this? Hint: It's not Bush...http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/2/13/133507.shtml

 

[SteveR]

It doesn't matter what proof you have, the democrats never let the truth get in the way of their agenda.

 

[Typhoon1244]

It doesn't matter what proof you have, the democrats never let the truth get in the way of their agenda.

I submit that no politician--Democrat, Republican, or other--will let the truth get in the way of their agenda. You have to lie to be successful in politics. It's as simple as that.

It doesn't surprise me that the Democrats are going after Bush about his service record. It's just more children fighting on the playground.

 

[CatYaaak]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Cannot sit idly by.

Well, I can't take credit for it. I'm just repeating the garbage I hear from my more conservative friends and neighbors: "how can Clinton be Commander-in-Chief when he's never served in combat?"
Oh how convenient. So now these mysterious "others" (your supposed friends and neighbours) think the barometer isn't just "served in Vietnam". No, now you say they say (for the sake of bolstering your untenable position) that it's because Clinton "never served in combat". Gee, I guess that Al Gore was a "draft-dodger" too, since he sat in a typing pool in Saigon, never seeing combat. Personally, I think it would be pretty lame to call Gore a "draft dodger", even though his Senator daddy got him that assignment.

"Are you telling me that orbiting a few miles outside Soviet airspace--well within range of missiles and interceptors--waiting for the "go" is just as cozy and safe as ANG duty in south Texas?"

No, I'm not telling you that, but that was never the issue (how conveniently you forget). The issue is one you chose when you tried to tell us that ANG duty in south Texas (and Guard duty in Indiana) constitutes "draft-dodging", remember? But examine the sentence you just wrote...."safe as ANG duty". DUTY. You admit that it's "duty". So how can one do this and also be a draft-dodger, like Clinton?

"True. Guard duty won't necessarily keep your buns out of the fire. But it sure worked for Bush and Quayle, didn't it? Would you say Quayle's service record is just as honorable as, say, John McCain's?"

So you admit Quayle has a service record?...you know, one of those things you get while wearing the uniform. Well, how can it be that Quayle has a service record if he's a draft-dodger like Clinton (who doesn't have one)? And why are you asking me if their service was honorable? The military decides that, and they decided that Quayle served honorably, just as McCain did, and Gore did, and Dole did, and Carter did, and Nixon did, and Reagan did, and Truman did, etc.. Are you asking me if Quayle's honorable service contains as much valor or heroism as McCains does?...of course not, but that's completely irrelevant to the issue of draft-dodging which is of course your original premise; that Guard duty (Bush, Quayle, my Korean War vet father) equates to draft-dodging (Clinton). You haven't even begun to try and justify the statement, which of course you can't.

"The fact that these men used their families' power and influence to secure their positions...if I were a reservist, I'd find that offensive."

I know some combat veterans who think Gore's securing his "Journalist" assignment due to his family's power and influence is offensive, but I can't recall any of them calling Gore a "draft-dodger". I know I certainly wouldn't either. Now, if I were to use YOUR tactics I'd say something like "Check the records and you'll find there were more F-102 pilot fatalities in that Texas Air Guard unit than in Gore's safe and cozy Saigon typing pool although admittedly Gore could have broken a nail on any given day". I mean, it would be as asinine as equating Guard duty with draft-dodging.

"By the way, I've managed to get through this thread without personally insulting anyone intentionally. I haven't said things like "you make me sick," "pretty lame of you," etc. Why are FlightInfo conservatives incapable of the same level of courtesy?"

Well I said "pretty lame of you", and I'm not a conservative (funny..yet predictable..how you make that assumption), however I found your remarks implying that Guard duty equates to draft-dodging discoureous to the extreme, and your shifting debate tactics lame (I could have said "sophmoric"...would that have made you feel better?) and deserved to be pointed out. If your skin is that thin then I suggest letting go of the political prism that leads you to demean someone else's service by trying to weave straw-man arguments based on innuendo and the supposed blathering of imaginary "friends".

 

[bobbysamd]

George Bush, fighter jockey

I was of draft age during those years and I recall them well. You have to understand the times. There were plenty of ordinary people who opted for the National Guard instead of being drafted. I had a college roommate who went into the Guard. There were others who joined the Coast Guard. Better that, I think, than trying to beat the draft. I had a friend who didn't sleep or eat for days before his physical. It worked for him; he was reclassified from 1-A to 1-Y.

I have a number of issues with young George Bush, but his military service is not one of them.

(In case anyone is interested, I registered for the draft the day of my 18th birthday. I was in college and had a 2-S deferment for two years until the lottery was instituted. I then had a high lottery number and could not be drafted, although I was reclassified to 1-A. I carried my draft card for another twenty years, until I called my draft board to ask if I still needed to carry it; it told me I did not. I still have my draft card.)

 

[bobbysamd]

George's UPT equipment

The following is from MSNBC:

Nov. 26, 1968 - Dec. 2, 1969
Attends undergraduate pilot training with the 3559th Student Squadron, Moody Air Force Base, Ga. He is trained to fly standard Air Force aircraft, including the T-31, T-37, and T-39.

I consider myself to be a pretty good AF airplane buff, but I had never heard of a T-31. Until now, when I found this article. Here's a related article.

Gee, I didn't know George was also a test pilot. C'mon, fair is fair. If you're going to report the news, report it accurately. Another example of bad reporting of aviation-related news.

 

[inline]

IF it's legitimate, why won't his commanding officers verify to the media that he never went AWOL?

You need to get your news from a source other than Molly Ivins or Michael Moore. If Bush was AWOL, how would he get an honorable discharge? This is all cooked up by the leftists.