WHY DlD BUSH/CHENEY WANT THE WAR OF CHOICE SO BADLY WHEN THEY THEMSELVES DID EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER TO NOT.

Question

SERVE WHEN IT WAS THEIR TURN IN VIETNAM?

BUSH/CHENEY
AWOL/5DEFERMENTS
IS THIS WHAT ARE KNOWN AS CHICKENHAWKS?

Answer 1

It's the same as baseball

Bush never played baseball but he wanted the Texas tax payers to buy him a team.

Go big Red Go

Answer 2

The question is illogical, but it does hint at other important questions about personal morality and ethics in leadership.

George W. Bush DID get preferential treatment in order to get a slot in the National Guard. This assured him of not having to go to Vietnam. His father's VP Dan Quayle did the same thing back then. And there is still ample evidence, despite what happened with Dan Rather and the CBS report, that Bush did find ways to avoid service even here at home when it was inconvenient for him (for example, avoiding service in order to campaign with/for his father and pursue business interests). As for Dick Cheney, there is no way to dispute that he blatantly avoided any form of military service during the Vietnam era, which has always struck me as odd given that he went on to serve as Sec. of Defense. Of course there is no requirement that a commander-in-chief or a SecDef or Vice President must have served in the military, but practically speaking, I would imagine that a President and Vice President contemplating war would be able to ask better questions and make better decisions about troop deployment, domestic/family impact, tactics, logistics, morale, etc. if they themselves had served (Then again, look at Rumsfeld -- he did three years of "gentleman service" in the Navy and even he fell victim to an overwhelming arrogance and myopia re Iraq).

At the most basic human level, shouldn't our leaders not ask a citizen to do anything (go to war) that they themselves were never willing to do? Isn't that what we mean with "leadership by example?" It does smack of hypocrisy -- old, white, elitist men sending teenagers off to die while they sit back and treat it all as an ideological chess game to be managed with obfuscation and patriotic rhetoric. If you want to really understand the deceit and hypocrisy involved in the leadership of the Iraq War, read T. Ricks' FIASCO. Also, go back and read Halberstam's THE BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST. You'll see the same arrogance and hypocrisy displayed by the "wise" men and Harvard-types who got us into Vietnam without having served in the military themselves (Robert McNamara is the most tragic example). They were driven by a false ideology just as the current administration seems to be.

NOTE:
Yes, I know our modern military is a "volunteer" force. Having served in that force as a young Marine officer I also know (despite what some pundits claim) huge numbers of the young people who enlist come from disadvantaged backgrounds. For them, the military is a voluntary choice only in the strictest technical sense of the word "choice." But that's a completely separate debate/issue.

Answer 3

Bush was not drafted. He did not dodge anything! The false reports on the AWOL are what lost Dan Rather his job.

Answer 4

I think I understand the question..

Did they want a war so badly that they didnt do everything in their power to not have one.

First off the premise that we should do everything in our power not to fight a war is flawed.

War is necessary sometimes.

You really need to work on your english, this is an english speaking site.

Answer 5

Hard to disagree with you... Yes the term is Chicken hawks. Check out my question on volunteers and read the answers particuarly the one about the army recruiter. If anyone should know he should.

Answer 6

Bush loves seeing people die, but he's a coward at heart like all bullies.

Answer 7

Send in the clones....I've created a monster.

Answer 8

43 is right on target.

Answer 9

Damn your sad. Do you honestly believe this crap or do you just think it is fun to say?

Answer 10

YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY A TERRORIST LOVER.