Come on, it takes a lot of courage for a deserter to put on one of his fancy dress faux military uniforms and stand in front of a crowd of service men and women and talk to those brave folks about sacrifice
2006-08-16 08:22:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Courage. I'd say he has a lot of courage. He puts up with the likes of people like you everday. He speaks his mind and he doesn't let 3rd world terrorist countries push him around. He doesn't flip flop like Clinton on every issue. He could, but that would be the wussy boy Clinton way. He had the courage to suggest years and years ago that we need an energy bill, only for it to be rejected. Look where we are now. He had the courage to stand up and say that social security needs to be changed. He had the courage to fight back against the terrorists that crashed planes into buildings. He had the courage to take the fight over there, instead of letting another 9/11 happen. He had the courage to be elected for a second term. Would you have the courage to be President of this country?
2006-08-16 15:31:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by danzahn 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Actually, I can think of a single act of courage - the Dubai ports deal (although Bush may have just underestimated the opposition to same.) Assuming he knew the heat he would take, that was fairly courageous. It was also the only time I can think of that the Dems used people's irrational fear against Bush instead of vice versa. Truly a case of Bush getting a taste of his own medicine - the public spanking him for no good reason. It was great to see.
2006-08-16 15:23:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
He had the moral courage to follow his convictions and his vision to lead this nation, and a coalition of other nations on the path of war against our enemies.
This takes courage because war is not a popular event. People die, innocent people die, soldiers die - hell, it is a terrible thing, even when it is necessary. And politically it is risky.
That's why a coward like Clinton never really went to war - he bombed Iraq [illegal! war crime!]*, he bombed Serbian civilians from high altitude [war crime! war crime!]* and he cut & ran from Haiti and Somalia, because he feared negative public opinion. His poll-driven presidency resulted in do-nothing mediocrity.
*[this is what liberals would have called it if done by a Republican Prez]
2006-08-16 15:47:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you are talking about physical harm, again he flew fighters in the National Guard and expected to ship out to Vietnam. Also every time he appears in public he risks getting shot like Reagan did and he risks getting blown up like almost happened to Margaret Thatcher.
Bush is a good man. He has not taken the most popular avenues, he has chosen the bolder path to lasting enduring freedom.
2006-08-16 20:25:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by John16 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Our Great Preident and How He Got Out Of Going To VietNam, In January of 1968, Bush sent enquiries to the National Guard. It seems Bush had had an epiphany: he wante to be a pilot, just like his dad. Well, not exactly like Pappy, who was shot down flying a fighter in World War II. Yes, Lil' Bush wanted to fly fighter jets, but not in dicey combat situations. That, naturally, would defeat the entire purpose of joining the Guard.At first blush, Bush didn't seem to have much of a shot at landing one of those choice positions. First, he flunked his medical test. Then he flunked his dental exam. And finally, as Ian Williams reveals in Deserter, his merciless indictment of Bush's disappearing act in the National Guard, he scores a rock-bottom 25 percent on his pilot aptitude examination. That's one out of four correct answers, a ratio that is not even a credible mark in cluster-bombing class. To put this achievement in perspective, the average score of applicants taking the pilot aptitude test was 77 percent, a whopping fifty-two percentage points higher than the proud product of the Yale ancestral admissions program. More than 95 percent of the testers scored higher than Bush, the Ivy Leaguer.Aptitude for piloting a fighter jet notwithstanding, on May 27, 1968, just nervy twelve days before the expiration of his student deferment, Bush the Younger was accepted into the Texas Air National Guard. On his application form under the heading "Background Qualifications," Bush declares in a refreshing spurt of honesty "None."Today the pipsqueak commander-in-chief has exploited the Guard and Army Reserve as a form of covert conscription to beef up troop numbers in Iraq and Afghanistan. But in those days National Guard squadrons were generally not being sent off to the frontlines in Vietnam. But just to be sure, Bush checked the box on his enlistment form saying he was unwilling to do time overseas. That box was a comfy failsafe that is no longer available to young people seduced into signing up as weekend warriors in Bush's National Guard.
2006-08-16 15:31:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by jdfnv 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
He said "bring 'em on!" to the Iraqis.
To Netjr: you say "again you challenge our President" - this is what democracy is about, he is not a monarch or a revered preacher. This is an American tradition to disagree or agree with the president, take your pick.
The aircraft he qualified to fly in the reserves was one that was never ever going to be used in combat again. Coincidence?
2006-08-16 15:23:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
"sending other peoples children to die"
America does not currently have a policy to send "children" into combat zones.
For examples of children in warfare see currently;
Hezbollah (Not only do they hide weapon depots underneath the beds of children, the strap bombs on children to commit homicide in the attempt to kill Jews)
Palestine (Children are ritually served up as willing participants in suicide bombing that includes the justification of blowing up school buses)
Africa (Children are 70% of the populations fighting force as most men are suffering from disease, aids)
Actually just go to Amnesty International for a formidable list.
2006-08-16 15:28:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by johncgaiser 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Again you challenge our President and not others that preceeded him?
GW learned how to fly a high quality military air craft and did so; what about the preceeding President.
As far as sending troops into harms way they both did that and deserve credit for doing so....if you feel that is an "easy" decision you got some serious issues.
2006-08-16 15:21:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by netjr 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
True courage is going against everyone to do what you know is right.
Our president has demostrated that over and over, Look at his approval ratings, it shows.
2006-08-16 15:23:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by Ricky T 6
·
0⤊
0⤋