NationStates Jolt Archive

The pic is at: http://img59.exs.cx/img59/2828/george_bush_uniform.jpg

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x654437

I'm sure this won't bother the anti-Kerry veterans on this board like HannibalSmith or FriendsofBill because... um... something.

http://img59.exs.cx/img59/2828/george_bush_uniform.jpg
Just helpin' ya out a little.

haha *points and laughs at monkey bush with a uni brow*

Opal, that photo looks photoshopped a bit...

That head just looks WAY too big...

Opal, that photo looks photoshopped a bit...

That head just looks WAY too big...
It doesn't look photoshopped to me...but that's just the image that the thread started linked too...I didn't find it.

Opal, that photo looks photoshopped a bit...

That head just looks WAY too big...
only because his body is turned slightly and the left shoulder fades into the black and out of picture

You gotta worship the man.

http://www.ericblumrich.com/liberation.html

when kerry turns out to be a bigger **** than bush, that will be the funniest think in a LONG time. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

**** = ?

**** = ?
pretty sure it means the exclusive body-part of the male gender

brain has 5 letters.

lol :D

brain has 5 letters.
oops, sorry...carry on ;)

that wink meant nothing ladies!

By the way, I apologize for the comment. I'm not a sexist and said the comment as a joke. I hope the ladies can realize this.

You liberals make me sick. That "Liberation" link is the biggest piece of liberal propaganda I've seen. Sure, let's not show people all the positive things being said and done in Iraq. We could make the US effort in WW2 look just as bad by picking out negative things that American soldiers say like in the video. If John Kerry is elected by people like you who do not think and use as Kerry says, "Hateful, negative politics", it will be a disgrace.

when kerry turns out to be a bigger **** than bush, that will be the funniest think in a LONG time. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Don't know about 'funny', but your right - everyone who thinks Kerry's going to turn around and solve every gripe they have with the Bush admin at the moment is sorely wrong.

Not as if there's any major difference between the two parties, just the lesser of two evils.

You liberals make me sick. That "Liberation" link is the biggest piece of liberal propaganda I've seen. Sure, let's not show people all the positive things being said and done in Iraq. We could make the US effort in WW2 look just as bad by picking out negative things that American soldiers say like in the video. If John Kerry is elected by people like you who do not think and use as Kerry says, "Hateful, negative politics", it will be a disgrace.
So...it's okay for the Swift Boat vets to spread their propaganda, since it's pro-Bush, but the liberals can't spread their propaganda?

You liberals make me sick.

You people who overgeneralise everything into a distorted, black & white 'Conservative vs. Liberal' debate make me sick.

We could make the US effort in WW2 look just as bad by picking out negative things that American soldiers say like in the video.

What would it take you to change your mind and believe that the occupation in iraq is being mishandled? What evidence would make you say that the negative consequences of continued occupation outweigh the good?

How do we know when we're winning in Iraq?

You liberals make me sick. That "Liberation" link is the biggest piece of liberal propaganda I've seen. Sure, let's not show people all the positive things being said and done in Iraq. We could make the US effort in WW2 look just as bad by picking out negative things that American soldiers say like in the video. If John Kerry is elected by people like you who do not think and use as Kerry says, "Hateful, negative politics", it will be a disgrace.
Yes. And what about all of the GOOD that Hitler did? And they never mention all of those NEAT PRESENTS that Micheal Jackson gave those kids! Those silly leftists will never see the truth.

Too Stupid To Be President Dot Com (http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/) ("Benny Hill Presidency" on the right is my favorite)

Bush in 30 Seconds (http://www.bushin30seconds.org/) (my favorite one is "what are we teaching our kids?")

;)

Yes. And what about all of the GOOD that Hitler did? And they never mention all of those NEAT PRESENTS that Micheal Jackson gave those kids! Those silly leftists will never see the truth.
I agree about Hitler did a lot of good for Germany but come on don't make fun of Micheal. He is still a confused man, is he black or white? He doesn't know lol
I mean he even made a video of it, but in seriousness he is a guy who has some issues he needs to work out.

Hitler made a Germany a third world-like country to a super power in a short while. Kinda fastest I remember any country changing to a super power.

But again He also did a few bad things, but he did some good.

You liberals make me sick. That "Liberation" link is the biggest piece of liberal propaganda I've seen. Sure, let's not show people all the positive things being said and done in Iraq. We could make the US effort in WW2 look just as bad by picking out negative things that American soldiers say like in the video. If John Kerry is elected by people like you who do not think and use as Kerry says, "Hateful, negative politics", it will be a disgrace.

It wasn't meant to be a documentary. Please continue to be sick.

Hitler made a Germany a third world-like country to a super power in a short while. Kinda fastest I remember any country changing to a super power.



Even faster at bringing it back to the stone age. Yeah, what a great man.

That is great evidence to show how much of a hypocrite Bush is.

Btw,
I found spending time on such "anyone who doesn't agree with me is a communist" people as Celticadia is not worth anything. They don't have the intellect, you see. ;)

You mean his pilot's wings? That's not a medal. It's a badge, sort of like the empulat's on an officer's soldier that indicate rank. The wings indicate that he flew planes.
However, I thought that mostly officers got wings. Does anyone know if he was an enlisted man or an officer?

You mean his pilot's wings?

No. Didn't you read the... apparently not.

That's not a medal. It's a badge, sort of like the empulat's on an officer's soldier that indicate rank. The wings indicate that he flew planes.
However, I thought that mostly officers got wings. Does anyone know if he was an enlisted man or an officer?

The other link on the first post (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x654437) answers these questions (along with quite a few others). The questionable medal is the "Air Force Outstanding Unit Award".

What didn't he earn.

What didn't he earn.

Read the link?

What would it take you to change your mind and believe that the occupation in iraq is being mishandled? What evidence would make you say that the negative consequences of continued occupation outweigh the good?

How do we know when we're winning in Iraq?

Agreed.
http://www.ericblumrich.com/PD.html

No. Didn't you read the... apparently not.

Now I did. I don't know if he earned it or not. But really, why are any of us fighting wars that ended years ago, including SBVFT? Let's focus on political records, not military ones. Unless Bush or Kerry are accused of murdering fellow soldiers, or genocide, I could care less.

Sure, let's not show people all the positive things being said and done in Iraq. says, "Hateful, negative politics", it will be a disgrace.


Yes, look at all the positive things, like independent contractors like Nick Berg getting publicly murdered. Or the millions of Iraqis who lost homes due to bombings. Sure, many positive things have happned. The fact is, getting rid of Saddam is a just cause, but is it worth sending 900 americans back home in body bags? NO, it isn't.

I

Yes, look at all the positive things, like independent contractors like Nick Berg getting publicly murdered. Or the millions of Iraqis who lost homes due to bombings. Sure, many positive things have happned. The fact is, getting rid of Saddam is a just cause, but is it worth sending 900 americans back home in body bags? NO, it isn't.

I

Millions homeless?

900 Americans dead from Iraq, 40,000+ will die in car accidents.

I think history will judge the war favorably

900 Americans dead from Iraq, 40,000+ will die in car accidents.



In the same time frame, that is

What would it take you to change your mind and believe that the occupation in iraq is being mishandled? What evidence would make you say that the negative consequences of continued occupation outweigh the good?

How do we know when we're winning in Iraq?

I know cause I've been there. And you people haven't. You just rely on what the government spoonfeeds you. I saw my best friend killed 30 feet away from me. I still support the war.

No. Didn't you read the... apparently not.



The other link on the first post (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x654437) answers these questions (along with quite a few others). The questionable medal is the "Air Force Outstanding Unit Award".

Your whole thread is invalid then. The AFOUA is awarded the same way the Presidential Unit Citation, or Meritorious Unit Citation is awarded in other branches: If your unit has earned it, you may wear it while you serve in the unit, but if they earned it while you were in the unit, then you may wear it forever.

Maybe you people need to join the military.

Ah, you an Army guy? The Air Force doesn't handle unit citations that way, and never has.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x662347

Another way to look at my question is - what would cause you to stop supporting the war? Another thousand american casualties? Ten thousand? Five years of occupation? Fifty? At what point would you tell yourself "this is a mistake?"

Now I did. I don't know if he earned it or not. But really, why are any of us fighting wars that ended years ago, including SBVFT? Let's focus on political records, not military ones. Unless Bush or Kerry are accused of murdering fellow soldiers, or genocide, I could care less.

I have no objection to that position - but you'll notice that the people who are so upset about Kerry's military record are absent from this thread. Why do you think that is?

I know cause I've been there. And you people haven't. You just rely on what the government spoonfeeds you. I saw my best friend killed 30 feet away from me. I still support the war.
Not to be morbid, but we don't really care if you saw your best friend killed. You don't know why I don't like what's going on in the world so you're wrong in assuming that I'm "relying on what the government spoonfeeds" me. Maybe I'm not mad about who is dieing as much as I'm made about the shifting reasons for the war. I'm not even about to say that Saddam was a good guy and we shouldn't have removed him. I felt he was a terrible person. I don't know any one who was actually opposed to removing Saddam. I can tell you right now though that I'd probably be more in support of the war if the reason given in the beginning was to liberate the Iraqis. That way I at least wouldn't have to be skepitical about the real reason because it would have been the same from start to finish.

Too Stupid To Be President Dot Com (http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/) ("Benny Hill Presidency" on the right is my favorite)

Bush in 30 Seconds (http://www.bushin30seconds.org/) (my favorite one is "what are we teaching our kids?")

;)
lmao


"That's the shower, that's our daughter, and that's the sink!"

Millions homeless?

900 Americans dead from Iraq, 40,000+ will die in car accidents.

I think history will judge the war favorably

I think a quote from your homeboy Ioseb Jughashvili would fit in nicely with your statement:

A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic.

Isn't it fun how you and the most brutal dictator of all-time share a common belief?

I think its kind of funny that all these people who served with Kerry are speaking against him while nobody who served with Bush can be found to say one damned word about him.

Not funny "ha-ha," just funny "odd." Its like these people don't exist... Maybe they never did. What with him going AWOL, that's probably the case.

Your whole thread is invalid then. The AFOUA is awarded the same way the Presidential Unit Citation, or Meritorious Unit Citation is awarded in other branches: If your unit has earned it, you may wear it while you serve in the unit, but if they earned it while you were in the unit, then you may wear it forever.

Maybe you people need to join the military.

True, True good point. BTW this Vietnam Vet thanks you for your service.

I have no objection to that position - but you'll notice that the people who are so upset about Kerry's military record are absent from this thread. Why do you think that is?


Maybe cause we have lives off of the computer! To those of us who served back then he is still an insult to our good names.

It is kind of funny though (this Swift boat ad) a group that has so much less cash then MoveOn is blowing them out of the water. This will probably be the most important commercial in this campaign. Nothing MoveOn has ever done has matched or even came as close to matching this ads' power. George Soros must be really pissed off.

Btw What is the Unfit for Command book ranked at if anybody knows?

I dont know what Unfit for Command is ranked at... but I do know that barnes and noble is completely sold out.

I dont know what Unfit for Command is ranked at... but I do know that barnes and noble is completely sold out.

Yeah I'm still waiting for my copy, they were completely sold out throughout the area. I had to order one from the internet.

Not to be morbid, but we don't really care if you saw your best friend killed. You don't know why I don't like what's going on in the world so you're wrong in assuming that I'm "relying on what the government spoonfeeds" me. Maybe I'm not mad about who is dieing as much as I'm made about the shifting reasons for the war. I'm not even about to say that Saddam was a good guy and we shouldn't have removed him. I felt he was a terrible person. I don't know any one who was actually opposed to removing Saddam. I can tell you right now though that I'd probably be more in support of the war if the reason given in the beginning was to liberate the Iraqis. That way I at least wouldn't have to be skepitical about the real reason because it would have been the same from start to finish.

Cause you choose to ignore the parts you don't want to hear. For years we've been decrying his illegal acts of all kinds that he's committed (firing on coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones, possession of missiles with range greater than the UN permits, atrocities on his own people) so don't say that we've shifted reasons. We gave a shotgun blast of reasons at the beginning of the war. Most all of them were accurate. One, (WMD) has yet to be proven. IT HAS ALSO YET TO BE DISPROVEN. Remember, it took over 50 years to find the hordes and caches of gold stolen by the Nazis. The reconstruction of Europe took years. Germany has only in the past years since the reunification become a power again. As for my reasons, you should care who I saw killed and why not, because before your liberal ilk go spouting about how our troops are misled, and didn't support the war, let me tell you that SPC Wise supported the war 100% through the end of his life. He paid the ultimate sacrifice for someone elses freedom. I think both parties need to stop worrying about attack ads, and smear campaigns, and realize that there are around 150,000 troops in Iraq ready to lay down their lives at any second for the safety and freedom of an oppressed people, and that is as worthy of a cause as any.

Ah, you an Army guy? The Air Force doesn't handle unit citations that way, and never has.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x662347

Another way to look at my question is - what would cause you to stop supporting the war? Another thousand american casualties? Ten thousand? Five years of occupation? Fifty? At what point would you tell yourself "this is a mistake?"

I'd say about fifty. I'm ready for us to pull out of Germany.

I'd say about fifty. I'm ready for us to pull out of Germany.

Which has exactly what to do with Iraq? We've had plans to redeploy from Germany since before the war.

UPDATE!!!!:

After analysis...it appears to be a photoshop.

First off, why would a lieutenant wear only two ribbons? It makes no sense. Anyway, so I did some searching,and it appears whoever photoshopped that image grabbed two awards at random without thinking as to which ones they were.

The one on the right (his left) is the Air Medal:

Which states (http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/awardsAsp/Medal.asp)

This decoration, established by Executive Order 9158, 11 May 1942, as amended by Executive Order 9242, 11 September 1942 is awarded to U.S. and civilian personnel for single acts of heroism or meritorious achievments while participating in aerial flight and foreign military personnel in actual combat in support of operations. Required achievement is less than that required for the Distingushed Flying Cross, but must be accomplished with distinction above and beyond that expected of professional airmen. It is not awarded for peace time sustained operational activities and flights. Approval or disapproval authority is delegated to MAJCOM/CC/CV for military and Secretary of the Air Force for civilians and foreign military personnel. MAJCOMs will identify the missions and positions that qualify for this award. HQ USAF/XO must certify MAJCOM criteria.

Therefore, since he didn't serve in combat, its HIGHLY unlikely that he would intentionally wear a medal for combat veterans.

UPDATE!!!!:

After analysis...it appears to be a photoshop.

First off, why would a lieutenant wear only two ribbons? It makes no sense. Anyway, so I did some searching,and it appears whoever photoshopped that image grabbed two awards at random without thinking as to which ones they were.

The one on the right (his left) is the Air Medal:

Which states (http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/awardsAsp/Medal.asp)

This decoration, established by Executive Order 9158, 11 May 1942, as amended by Executive Order 9242, 11 September 1942 is awarded to U.S. and civilian personnel for single acts of heroism or meritorious achievments while participating in aerial flight and foreign military personnel in actual combat in support of operations. Required achievement is less than that required for the Distingushed Flying Cross, but must be accomplished with distinction above and beyond that expected of professional airmen. It is not awarded for peace time sustained operational activities and flights. Approval or disapproval authority is delegated to MAJCOM/CC/CV for military and Secretary of the Air Force for civilians and foreign military personnel. MAJCOMs will identify the missions and positions that qualify for this award. HQ USAF/XO must certify MAJCOM criteria.

Therefore, since he didn't serve in combat, its HIGHLY unlikely that he would intentionally wear a medal for combat veterans.

Thanks for reminding me! I couldn't see it so good, but you are right, you don't receive it for home duty.

Not to mention that official pictures in the military were, and are, color. Yet more evidence of a photoshop. Look VERY closely at the bend and angle of the ribbons. Notice they don't distort his uniform. Again, evidence of photoshop. Their shadow is all wrong. I could go on for days.

Oooh... it's a photoshop. I find many of your reasons amusing; no one claimed that it was an official military picture. The other medal has been identified by other people as a "Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon", which is on Bush's discharge papers. For you not to even acknowledge that means to me that you haven't read even the topmost article on the subject, much less the discussion - as various left-wing people ask questions about the picture, and they're answered.

The issue of "a 2nd lieutenant with two medals" was asked and answered; before Vietnam heated up, that really wasn't uncommon - they didn't hand them out as quickly as they did later.

If you're so confident that it's a photoshop, I have a question for you:
What would it mean to you if it were true that Bush is wearing a medal he didn't earn?

Hypothetically speaking, I mean. Assuming this breaks into the mainstream media and there's an official response from the Bush campaign other than "that's a bogus picture". What would it mean then?

The reason I'm asking now is that if I wait for it to be proven, I feel comfortable you'll just instantly shift how you feel about it without noticing any contradiction. Your position on WMD illustrates that; Colin Powell said that we knew about tons and tons and tons of material. Donald Rumsfeld said that we knew where the missiles were. Bush said we had found the WMD - the trailers. Everyone - including David Kay admits that all of this was mistaken. We've captured just about everyone who might conceiveably know where these missiles are.

What would it take for this to be disproven in your mind? Fifty years of being unable to find these phantom weapons? A few more invasions, just in case?

(Finally, several of your other arguments were debunked in the 'is the Iraq war illegal' thread - the no-fly zones had no legal sanction other than "emergency" in 1991, so firing on planes enforcing them wasn't terribly illegal. I'm also astonished that you value your fellow soldier's lives so cheaply that you'd trade nine hundred of them for ten kilometers worth of missile range, on missiles that Saddam was willing to destroy under inspection.)

First off, you obviously know nothing about military awards:

http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/awardsAsp/decs.asp

Look at the Air medal, then look at the picture. It adds up. Now look at the small arms expert marksmanship ribbon. Notice it has two thin gold lines not in the photo, and the bright and dark on the colors does not match up.

Second, military officers do not pose for non-official photos in their dress uniforms. So, the thought that a REAL professional grade black and white picture contains that is absurd.

Third, I HAVE read that document that you claimed that I haven't. And it only proves my point: If it was a real picture, he would be actually wearing the medals that he earned. You notice there is no National Defense service medal on his uniform. He earned it. Why isn't he wearing it. Oh yes, cause its a photoshop.

If it was true that he was wearing a medal that he didn't earn, I would expect that Marine corps false-medal guy to have outted him already, but he hasn't. Beyond that, if it WERE true, I would expect him to be charged under the Universal Code of Military Justice.

As for my statements of WMDs, show me where I said anything about the subject. Wrong. All I've said is that they're probably hidden somewhere that we haven't found yet. You know who else said they knew about the WMDs? John Kerry, Diane Feinstein, Al Gore, Bill Clinton.....How quickly we retract our statements.

As for my arguments, they were not "debunked". Only in your mind. We can play forum lawyer all we want here, but in the end, only the UN gets to decide how their charter stands legally, not some forum liberal cause he doesn't like the way the real world is.



Oooh... it's a photoshop. I find many of your reasons amusing; no one claimed that it was an official military picture. The other medal has been identified by other people as a "Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon", which is on Bush's discharge papers. For you not to even acknowledge that means to me that you haven't read even the topmost article on the subject, much less the discussion - as various left-wing people ask questions about the picture, and they're answered.

The issue of "a 2nd lieutenant with two medals" was asked and answered; before Vietnam heated up, that really wasn't uncommon - they didn't hand them out as quickly as they did later.

If you're so confident that it's a photoshop, I have a question for you:
What would it mean to you if it were true that Bush is wearing a medal he didn't earn?

Hypothetically speaking, I mean. Assuming this breaks into the mainstream media and there's an official response from the Bush campaign other than "that's a bogus picture". What would it mean then?

The reason I'm asking now is that if I wait for it to be proven, I feel comfortable you'll just instantly shift how you feel about it without noticing any contradiction. Your position on WMD illustrates that; Colin Powell said that we knew about tons and tons and tons of material. Donald Rumsfeld said that we knew where the missiles were. Bush said we had found the WMD - the trailers. Everyone - including David Kay admits that all of this was mistaken. We've captured just about everyone who might conceiveably know where these missiles are.

What would it take for this to be disproven in your mind? Fifty years of being unable to find these phantom weapons? A few more invasions, just in case?

(Finally, several of your other arguments were debunked in the 'is the Iraq war illegal' thread - the no-fly zones had no legal sanction other than "emergency" in 1991, so firing on planes enforcing them wasn't terribly illegal. I'm also astonished that you value your fellow soldier's lives so cheaply that you'd trade nine hundred of them for ten kilometers worth of missile range, on missiles that Saddam was willing to destroy under inspection.)

Also, its very difficult to tell whether that award photoshopped onto the left side is the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award: http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/awardsAsp/images/row05.jpg or the Air Force Organizational Excellence Award http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/awardsAsp/images/row05.jpg. It's black and white. You have no way of telling. If it IS the second, that award was not created until 1969, so again, I say its a photoshop job.

Let me ask you: You don't know where this picture came from. Some liberal just put it on the internet. How do you know its NOT photoshopped? Think about it. If it was real, do you think MSNBC, CNN, ABC, all the liberal news channels wouldn't be all over it in a second?

I know cause I've been there. And you people haven't. You just rely on what the government spoonfeeds you. I saw my best friend killed 30 feet away from me. I still support the war.

I've been there too. Does that mean my feelings hold more weight than my fellow countrymen? Does that mean my feelings and thoughts are on an equal par as your own?

I have and will continue to stand against the war in Iraq.

Because I've been there and oppose your view, will you accept my views on an equal level as your own or were you using that type of statement merely to add more weight to a shaky comment?

Serving in the military doesn't mean that a person has more right to talk about their opinions than those who didn't. The type of argument you've used can be basically construed to mean that you believe there are two classes of American citizens and those who are not of the same class as yourself are not worthy.

I've already heard from Hannibal how he feels about other veterans who don't agree with him. Do you play upon the same level as he does or are you a person who will listen to reason?

Oh, I enjoyed it when you interpreted the UN resolutions but told me that I wasn't allowed to 'read the charter'. Whatever. That was hashed out in a lot of detail, not repeating myself.

Let me ask you: You don't know where this picture came from. Some liberal just put it on the internet. How do you know its NOT photoshopped?

Well, the person who originally posted it also referenced Bush's promotion picture with his dad, which I have seen before. I've also seen Bush in a recruiting poster at the time (with an ironic anti-drug reference), so I know there was a fondess for photographing the young man.

I believe that the photograph came from the same place that Iraq's WMDs are now. if you can tell me where all the WMDs are in Iraq, that's the same place the photo came from. (If you look into the facts, btw, you'll find that other countries believed that Iraq still had WMDs because the US told them so, not because they had their own evidence. They won't make that mistake again.)

Think about it. If it was real, do you think MSNBC, CNN, ABC, all the liberal news channels wouldn't be all over it in a second?

There are no liberal news channels in this country; this can be illustrated by the amount of free air time the swifties have gotten. Heck, even PBS is running Tucker Carlson and the Wall Street Journal editorial board.

Maybe they'll pick up on it, maybe they won't. Maybe it's photoshopped, although I really doubt anyone would go to such length for such a trivial issue - that's just paranoid.

I'm mostly just enjoying the double standard for evidence critical of Bush, and evidence critical of Kerry. I shouldn't be surprised; Colin Powell slammed the "Clouseau-esque" UN weapons inspectors. Now? "These things take time..."

Good lord you people like to gripe. Why don't we all just support our respective candidates and vote (if we're old enough) for them in November? I mean, come on. Is all this negativity really going to help anybody? All you're doing by arguing is creating negative feelings. When this thread dies, no one will be any wiser.

Cause you choose to ignore the parts you don't want to hear. For years we've been decrying his illegal acts of all kinds that he's committed (firing on coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones, possession of missiles with range greater than the UN permits, atrocities on his own people) so don't say that we've shifted reasons. We gave a shotgun blast of reasons at the beginning of the war. Most all of them were accurate. One, (WMD) has yet to be proven. IT HAS ALSO YET TO BE DISPROVEN. Remember, it took over 50 years to find the hordes and caches of gold stolen by the Nazis. The reconstruction of Europe took years. Germany has only in the past years since the reunification become a power again. As for my reasons, you should care who I saw killed and why not, because before your liberal ilk go spouting about how our troops are misled, and didn't support the war, let me tell you that SPC Wise supported the war 100% through the end of his life. He paid the ultimate sacrifice for someone elses freedom. I think both parties need to stop worrying about attack ads, and smear campaigns, and realize that there are around 150,000 troops in Iraq ready to lay down their lives at any second for the safety and freedom of an oppressed people, and that is as worthy of a cause as any.

Based off the reasons being given to the American public (no matter what the real reasons were), we are shifting reasons. I don't like the war because of that. The Bush Administration should've been straight up from the start if they were that justified.

Yes, it does mean your feelings hold more weight than your countrymen, and yes, I hold it on equal par as my own.

Don't put words into my mouth. I wasn't saying there are two classes- military and non-military. I'm saying those who have BEEN in the military are more knowledgable about the subject matter than those who haven't.

I haven't heard from Hannibal about how he feels- care to enlighten me?

I've been there too. Does that mean my feelings hold more weight than my fellow countrymen? Does that mean my feelings and thoughts are on an equal par as your own?

I have and will continue to stand against the war in Iraq.

Because I've been there and oppose your view, will you accept my views on an equal level as your own or were you using that type of statement merely to add more weight to a shaky comment?

Serving in the military doesn't mean that a person has more right to talk about their opinions than those who didn't. The type of argument you've used can be basically construed to mean that you believe there are two classes of American citizens and those who are not of the same class as yourself are not worthy.

I've already heard from Hannibal how he feels about other veterans who don't agree with him. Do you play upon the same level as he does or are you a person who will listen to reason?





"There are no liberal news channels in this country; this can be illustrated by the amount of free air time the swifties have gotten. Heck, even PBS is running Tucker Carlson and the Wall Street Journal editorial board."

No liberal news channels in the country? Thats news to me. How about you read "Bias" by Bernard Goldberg, who exposed liberal news scandals at CBS: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060520841/qid=1093500415/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/104-7174534-2846336?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

or

"A National Party No More: The Conscience of a Conservative Democrat" by Zell Miller http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0974537616/ref=pd_sim_books_2/104-7174534-2846336?v=glance&s=books

or

"Slander : Liberal Lies About the American Right" by Ann Coulter
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1400049520/ref=pd_sim_books_1/104-7174534-2846336?v=glance&s=books

or:Arrogance: Rescuing America From the Media Elite
by Bernard Goldberg

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/044653191X/ref=pd_sim_books_4/104-7174534-2846336?v=glance&s=books

or: Give Me a Break : How I Exposed Hucksters, Cheats, and Scam Artists and Became the Scourge of the Liberal Media...
by John Stossel

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060529148/ref=pd_sim_books_2/104-7174534-2846336?v=glance&s=books

And before you say it: Yes. I know the conservatives are just as bad. That's why I don't watch Fox very much either. In fact, I think televised news is a terrible medium for getting information, since the entire length of time it takes to actually get the news is a fraction of the length of the program, so the rest of the show is talking about it, where the left/right bias comes out. Thats why if I HAVE to get news on TV I watch headline news, otherwise I just get it straight from AP/Reuters.

OK, I appreciate your sentiment then. As for Hannibal, that's something you'll just have to ask him about. As you're not familiar, I won't attempt to further bias your opinion of him in any way.

You're saying that those who have been there know more about what's going on? I'm curious about that because the independent media sources available to the military is extremely limited. Certainly no one would argue that a soldier's perspective provides a unique view that others could not possibly understand. However, when it comes time to decide whether to support or oppose the war, it does not take that perspective to make a decision based upon logic and reason. At what time did you serve in Iraq? I'm a Gulf War veteran so perhaps my perspective is from a much different angle than your own. Either way, I still wouldn't be so dismissive of those who haven't experienced the same things as you have. You don't have to experience childbirth to appreciate the miracle of the event.


Now, as for the supposed Liberal media, the books you cite as proof of your stance are all written by rightwing conservatives, the same ones who have been screaming for ages on every news source known to mankind how their people can't get their voices heard. How interesting then that they get so much press.

And before you say something about Zell Miller, I am fully aware he says he's a Democrat. However, you can't call him a representative Democrat when he's giving a keynote speech at the Republican Convention. We, as a party, would be happy to trade him in return for Lincoln Chafee and Olympia Snowe. They're practically ours anyway. Give em up. If not a deal, don't worry, Miller will switch to the Republican Party as soon as its politically advantageous for him to do so.

And in response to your booklist, I'll supply one of my own, most of which I've read:

Media Control by Noam Chomsky

The Republican Noise Machine by David Brock

Fat Man Fed Up by Jack Germond

What Liberal Media? by Eric Alterman

The Oh Really? Factor by Peter Hart

A Vast Conspiracy by Jeffrey Toobin

The Best Democracy Money Can Buy by Greg Palast

Big Lies by Joe Conason

Bushwhacked by Molly Ivins

Each of Al Franken's books...

And a personal favorite of the president:

My Pet Goat by Siegfried Engelman

Wow, so his discharge papers do not list that award?

So what?

My DD214 does not list all of my medals and ribbons either. :rolleyes:

Neither of my marksmanship awards (M-16 and 9mm) are on there and I shot expert every time I requalified.

So even though they are not listed on my DD-214, they are on my uniform. And have been for many years. ;)

My view is that no one should have the right to judge another person until they are perfect GO BUSH

My view is that no one should have the right to judge another person until they are perfect GO BUSH

So in your opinion, Bush is wrong by running negative and attack ads on television?

funny, people like you (celticadia, mostly) were so opposed to getting involved in WW2 because we were "natural allies with the aryan race"

but killing a bunch of arabs, now... not only is that a just cause (i mean, they're not white or christian, no?) but the massive civilian casualties and atrocities that are comitted along the way are unimportant because of "all the good things we're doing there."

like installing Allawi... who declared martial law as soon as he took office, and otherwise seems to nicely fit the stated US goal (from the 90s) of an "iron fisted saddam-style junta, without saddam hussein"

yup. great day for freedom and amurka.

and yes, john kerry IS going to be a huge dick. and he's not a pacifist OR an anti-war candidate. which is really too bad.

i do get the impression that he's gonna stick that dick in the faces of the rest of the world, the poor, elderly, working and middle classes, queers, political dissidents, servicemembers and women and demand that they suck it a LITTLE BIT LESS OFTEN however.

heh. it should be the new campaign slogan: John Kerry: for a world of SLIGHTLY less forced fellatio!

funny, people like you were so opposed to getting involved in WW2 because we were "natural allies with the aryan race"

but killing a bunch of arabs, now... not only is that a just cause (i mean, they're not white or christian, no?) but the massive civilian casualties and atrocities that are comitted along the way are unimportant because of "all the good things we're doing there."

like installing Allawi... who declared martial law as soon as he took office, and otherwise seems to nicely fit the stated US goal (from the 90s) of an "iron fisted saddam-style junta, without saddam hussein"

yup. great day for freedom and amurka.

and yes, john kerry IS going to be a huge dick. and he's not a pacifist OR an anti-war candidate. which is really too bad.

i do get the impression that he's gonna stick that dick in the faces of the rest of the world, the poor, elderly, working and middle classes, queers, political dissidents, servicemembers and women and demand that they suck it a LITTLE BIT LESS OFTEN however.

heh. it should be the new camaign slogan: John Kerry: for a world of SLIGHTLY less forced fellatio!

amurka???

have you ever heard the acting president pronounce all the syllables?

according to him, we don't live in the United States of America

or the United States of Anything
just Amurka.


that's all.


also, swiftboat-for-truth supporters have a lotta damn gall scrutinizing kerry's record when georgie went awol from the cushiest fortunate-son nat'l guard appointment in the country (which he jumped ahead of craploads of people to get into)

not that i mind draftdodgers. if GWB were honest about his draft dodging, and not a fascist chickenhawk later in life, i wouldn't be nearly so hard on him.

and i realize he's not technically a fascist. it's a figure of speech commonly applied to right-wing reactionaries.

Ah, I totally missed that. Ok, it makes sense now.

If you want to make fun of someone, in this case Bush, because of their bad language skills, at least try to look respectable yourself. Like capitalizing the first letters in your sentence.

I haven't heard from Hannibal about how he feels- care to enlighten me?
You won't be hearing from Hannibal, at least not under that name. He got Forumbanned for flaming in another Kerry thread.

You won't be hearing from Hannibal, at least not under that name. He got Forumbanned for flaming in another Kerry thread.

Which thread was that? Has it been deleted or simply locked? I'm curious what exactly was said.

Which thread was that? Has it been deleted or simply locked? I'm curious what exactly was said.
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=6872252

----"Universal Code of Military Justice"

Its uniform code of military justice isn't it. Other than that I agree with your sentiments.

No liberal news channels in the country? Thats news to me.

Of course it's news to you; you believe that somehow we still may discover Saddam's promised WMD caches.

The books you cite are crap, and have been resoundingly debunked. Just because someone writes something in a book doesn't make it magically true.

How about you read:

On Bernie Goldberg (who really should have paid for a fact-checker, and might have wanted to apply his 'liberal bias' tests to the Washington Times):
http://www.dailyhowler.com/h011002_2.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/h011202_1.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/h011402_1.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/h011602_1.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/h030402_1.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh111703.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/h030802_1.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/h031202_1.shtml
http://iraqnow.blogspot.com/2004/03/arrogance-book-review.html

On Ann Coulter (who started and ended Slander with lies):
http://slannder.homestead.com/files/slanndermain.html
http://www.anncoulter.blogspot.com/ (A nice page of links to debunkings of Slander)
http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20020713.html
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh070902.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071002.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071102.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071202.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071502.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071702.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh072202.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh072302.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh072402.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh072502.shtml
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh072602.shtml
http://www.whatliberalmedia.com/apndx_1.htm
http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20031023.html

John Stossel has a history of lying and misrepresenting facts in order to promote himself:
http://www.fastq.com/~dwaz/stossel.html
http://www.fair.org/media-outlets/stossel.html
particularly http://www.fair.org/activism/stossel-tampering.html
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0ICQ/is_2004_Feb_9/ai_112987550
http://www.ewg.org/reports/givemeafake/stossel.html

So no, I'm not going to tell you that the right is just as bad. I'm going to tell you that you've been lied to like a chump, and you believe it.

Maybe you should also check out "What liberal media?" by Eric Alterman - I've heard it's good, but I haven't read it yet.

I have no objection to that position - but you'll notice that the people who are so upset about Kerry's military record are absent from this thread. Why do you think that is?
Because they don't want to get involved in this, that's why. It's silly to be mudslingling on something so irrelevant, and deep down, everyone knows it.

Because they don't want to get involved in this, that's why. It's silly to be mudslingling on something so irrelevant, and deep down, everyone knows it.

I'll have to take your word for it, because there's an awful lot of silly mudslinging going on against Kerry, against MoveOn, against people who believe in climate change, and against Europe.

so put me out of my slow modem misery
did anyone ever say where this photo actually came from?

no explanation=not real

i blew the photo up in photoshop and it looks good to me. it easier to fake stuff with B&W than it is with color but it has very few of the markers of a paste up. if its fake, i would think it was bush's head pasted onto someone elses body. but even the name tag looked good blown up.

*shrug*
not that i care, but id really like to know if someone is so pathetic as to try to set up bush this way.

so put me out of my slow modem misery
did anyone ever say where this photo actually came from?

no explanation=not real

This is a fair point, and you got me curious. Much flipping later, I found where this comes from: it's part of Bush's military record that the campaign released.

You can see a (much lower quality) scan of this picture in USA today's archive at http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/11-2_2004_Personnel_File.pdf It's page 12 out of 37.

The rest of the archive is at http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-02-14-bush-docs.htm

I'll have to take your word for it, because there's an awful lot of silly mudslinging going on against Kerry, against MoveOn, against people who believe in climate change, and against Europe.
Still, they're more relevant to the campaign (especially Kerry) than a war thirty years ago. Who cares who won a purple heart, or aviator wings, or anything? Who cares if Kerry was either in Cambodia or Vietnam? He could've been in Peru for all I care. I want to stick to the issues, not to symbols or war stories.

I want to stick to the issues, not to symbols or war stories.

You and Kerry both. And, well, most of the recent mud-slinging against Kerry has revolved around that same war.

thanks uptight.

its all a distraction from the real issues, isnt it? if we obsess over vietnam we dont have to look at whats happened in the last 4 years and if we are "better off than we were 4 years ago"

Indeed. By the way, more US soldiers have now died in Iraq in 2004 than died in 2003. (More in both relative and absolute terms.)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/8/26/163629/155
http://icasualties.org/oif/

Damn it.

You and Kerry both. And, well, most of the recent mud-slinging against Kerry has revolved around that same war.
Still, I think that a good way to end this nonsense is if Kerry removes the Vietnam war as a central theme of his campaign. In the 19th century, campaigns were based on symbols, not issues. I fear we're regressing to those days.

Still, I think that a good way to end this nonsense is if Kerry removes the Vietnam war as a central theme of his campaign. In the 19th century, campaigns were based on symbols, not issues. I fear we're regressing to those days.

Um, you're blaming the victim there. Look at Kerry's speeches and see how often he mentions Vietnam.

Then take a look at what issues Bush has brought to the table.

Why else other than symbolism would Bush hold his convention in NYC - a city he and many other republicans apparently despise - and hold it later than other political conventions?

Edit - check my other posts where I cite the Financial Times article from December 2003. This attack has been waiting to be unleashed on Kerry, and it would have happened even if he'd never mentioned Vietnam once.

I agree about Hitler did a lot of good for Germany but come on don't make fun of Micheal. He is still a confused man, is he black or white? He doesn't know lol
I mean he even made a video of it, but in seriousness he is a guy who has some issues he needs to work out.

Hitler made a Germany a third world-like country to a super power in a short while. Kinda fastest I remember any country changing to a super power.

But again He also did a few bad things, but he did some good.


Germany was never a 3rd world country, they were in a depression like everyone else at the time.

This message is hidden because HannibalSmith is on your ignore list.

Anyone else like the sight of this?

Anyone else like the sight of this?
not as much as i liked the last post on this thread

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=6872252

Um, you're blaming the victim there. Look at Kerry's speeches and see how often he mentions Vietnam.

Then take a look at what issues Bush has brought to the table.

Why else other than symbolism would Bush hold his convention in NYC - a city he and many other republicans apparently despise - and hold it later than other political conventions?

Edit - check my other posts where I cite the Financial Times article from December 2003. This attack has been waiting to be unleashed on Kerry, and it would have happened even if he'd never mentioned Vietnam once.
Why do the Republicans despise New York?

Why do the Republicans despise New York?
too many democrats

----"Universal Code of Military Justice"

Its uniform code of military justice isn't it. Other than that I agree with your sentiments.

Did I say that? Yes, it is Uniform. My bad.

Thunderland: I arrived in Kuwait Feb 03, departed Iraq Feb 04. As for the news sources available to me, I had an embed NBC reporter with us during the invasion who gave us realtime access to AP wires. Once she left, we were already in baghdad, and had set up (relatively frequent) internet access so I could get my daily emails of news briefs. We had GQ as an embed for a couple weeks too. We're featured in the Feb. 04 Issue with Ashton Kutcher on the front. I'm the guy quoted talking about the techniques of masturbating. You should read it sometime.

how do you know he never earned it