Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-19-2010, 02:55 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,461,121 times
Reputation: 4799

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime View Post
Ok, to prove that he did not serve the require time (or it was covered up) how can anyone serve 4 years and ONLY make 1st Lt? They can hide his service time but not his rank. If he had served his complete 4 year enlistment he would have been at LEAST a Captain. A civilian who never served would not know this but ANYONE who has would know this. The exception to this rule if he had been a screw up and thus would have been denied being promoted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Barack Obama: None (Big Fat Zero)
George. W. Bush: First Lieutenant Vietnam War
Bill Clinton: Nada (begged not to serve and used his charm to make it happen)
George H. W. Bush: Lieutenant WW II
Ronald Wilson Reagan: Stateside Service During WW II and Army Reserves 1937 - 1945
Jimmy Carter: Lieutenant US naval Academy
Gerald Ford: Lieutenant Commander WW II
Richard Nixon: Commander WW II
Lyndon B. Johnson: Commander WW II
John F. Kennedy: Lieutenant WW II
Dwight D. Eisenhower: WW I and WW II
Harry S. Truman: WW I
Franklin D. Roosevelt: Nil
Herbert Hoover: Zilch
Calvin Coolidge: Zero
Warren G. Harding: Zip
Woodrow Wilson: None
William Howard Taft: XXXX!

And still more soldiers have died on democrat's watch overall. More accurately progressives are the most responsible for the death of soldiers. Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson....
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-19-2010, 02:55 PM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,319,525 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by bily4 View Post
Sorry, I thought this thread was about Bush's military service.

My mistake.
Which was virtually nonexistent
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2010, 02:57 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,461,121 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdavid002 View Post
News flash..newsflash...George W Bush no longer President or even in politics...film at 11...good Lord..how many stupid pills do liberals take in the morning..anyway..
One important one, Lithium. Although it's obvious some think that is optional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2010, 03:05 PM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,319,525 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Look, all the same people that flock to Bush threads are in here questioning his service while at the same time are eerily silent at the wars of Obama, Clinton, Roosevelt, and Wilson. Of course all that doesn't matter because they're not progressives responsible for the majority of the deaths in the wars of military interventions. Make yourselves loud and clear so everyone here understands how hypocritical you are!
They did not start an illegal war and possibly profit from it directly or indirectly. Roosevelt and Wilson were in the mist of a REAL World War, Clinton was to old to serve during the Gulf war and Obama was too young during Vietnam War. And non of them PRETENDED to be in the military or got treated differently based on their parents wealth and power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2010, 03:12 PM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,319,525 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
I did know that there was such a thing as "yearly enlistments" during wartime. Im sure that our brave young men/women who were and are serving in the war that he created
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2010, 03:18 PM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,319,525 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyber Queen View Post
I know, believe me I know, I lost my brother in Iraq, but does that mean all the service men and woman that served but did not do it during war time did not sacrifice as much as those that did? I simply don't believe that. When people serve in the military no matter if it is for one day or 1000 they took time from their lives to do it. They took time away from family to do it. No one should place a measure on what is "enough" of a sacrifice.
The point is that he was given special favors so that he did not perform ALL of the duties that was assigned to him. When you serve in the military (which obviously you did'nt) everyone is treated the same to avoid favoritism and morale breakdown. But he took it one step further since he did not attend the required training it handicapped him from being an effective leader down the line. If he sacrificed anything it was 15 weekends from drinking and frug feuled parties while many other patriots dies in his place
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2010, 03:21 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,461,121 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime View Post
They did not start an illegal war and possibly profit from it directly or indirectly. Roosevelt and Wilson were in the mist of a REAL World War, Clinton was to old to serve during the Gulf war and Obama was too young during Vietnam War. And non of them PRETENDED to be in the military or got treated differently based on their parents wealth and power.

YouTube - Democrats before Iraq War started....

Clinton was just the right age for Vietnam although he begged dearly not to be in it. Obama would have been old enough to serve though he decided not to. He yet decided to run campaigns about how the Cold War was a lost cause and Reagan should give up on his ambitions of being a nuclear power (not surprising considering he grew up and openly sought out devote communist as friends). How ironic is it that he's now vehemently going after START treaties... Not that you would know what START treaties were the most productive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2010, 03:25 PM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,319,525 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
bush did in fact volunteer for service in vietnam. He was turned down because he didnt have enough flight time in aircraft that were being used in vietnam.

Why is this? Because he did not attend the drill when he was suppose to


the documents used to try to demonize bush were false, and were proven false. So much so that dan rather lost his job at cbs for knowingly using falsified documents. And yes kerry served, but used loopholes, and scratches to get out early.

The docuements may have been false but the truth were still there, not to mention his father's influence over his son's military career. Did'nt kerry go to vietnam twice? Personally if he went over there and played with his toes, the fact remained that he went and bush did not!

Bush flew f102 interceptors in the air national guard. It was not an easy plane to learn to fly, but he did it. Kind of makes you think that bush is not as dumb as people are suggesting.

Did he do it alone or di dhe have a copilot that basically told him what to do?

You make claims but come up with no evidence to back up those claims. If your detective were to do that he would be laughed out of court and bounced from the force.
explain please why he was released as a 1lt? Which said alot about his service/integrity/compentence of his military career
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2010, 03:28 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,481 posts, read 10,221,813 times
Reputation: 2536
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime View Post
Moderator note: This discussion was off-topic for its thread, so I've split it off.

Reality check! Bush did not give a damn about the military! He proved that during his own enlistment(?) What little that he did was for his cronies in the military complex, can you say haliburton? Bringing up the POTUS in this discussion as no baring on anything. Obama did not serve and NO ONE in Bush's administration served either (don't count Colin Powell b/c they did not listen to him anyway) but yet started the crap in Iraq!
You do understand Bush is not president
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2010, 03:29 PM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,319,525 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
and I am assuming you did serve? If not, are you saying you don't care about the military?

Nita
20 years USAF during the first Gulf War, My father also served 20 years and WENT to Vietnam and Korea and presently my son is serving in the AF. So I ask you what is your point by asking me that
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:19 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top