It's now well established that George W. Bush never showed up for National Guard duty for a period of approximately one year, possibly more, in 1972-1973. Despite all the talk about "honor and dignity" our President seemed to have dodged his duties and responsibilities he volunteered for with the U.S. Armed Forces.
2007-02-23 19:16:11 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
That is so shameful
2007-02-24 14:50:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Your question shows you've been not at all interior the military, do no longer comprehend the way the shelter and Reserve artwork and are in simple terms being a parrot of a few thing you've been advised by some different person. AWOL in effortless words applies if someone is on prolonged lively duty. If someone is interior the shelter or Reserve and misses drills, they don't look AWOL. they'd be charged with "failure for instance" yet they don't look AWOL. Secondly, the in effortless words element that makes human beings take position for drills is factors. in the journey that they don't get sufficient factors for a year, it really is termed a "undesirable year" and does no longer count number for retirement. Bush had a nasty year. huge deal. in case you pick to be disillusioned about some thing, how about KERRY deserting his submit throughout wrestle? inspect his medal citation. He became commander of the boat. He grounded the boat leaving it a sitting duck and ran off into the jungle to shoot a baby interior the decrease back. He broke truly some commonly used miltiary doctrines and were given a medal for it. must be awesome to be an in intensity own buddy of the #a million democrat candidate for president on the time, Teddy.....
2016-12-04 21:18:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
For one thing that AWOL male bovine excrement is just that: BS. If he'd been AWOL, PRESIDENT Bush would have received non-judicial punishment at the minimum...No such thing happened!
Good thing you live in America otherwise spreading false tales about a leader in MANY countries would have been awarded with a visit from the Security Police and you would have been dragged from your house in the middle of the night and never seen again.
All you've managed to do with this is make yourself look foolish. Congratulations!
I wonder what secrets would be uncovered if YOUR life was investigated? Must be great being you and being so perfect.
2007-02-24 03:43:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
This was debated oh, maybe 8 years ago.
The media is slamming him left and right & you want to start debating a perceived crime 35 years ago - yes perceived, never charged, never convicted of any wrong doing. It is a media perception. Get over it. Or at least find a topic from current events.
& if you ask me, i think there is more than a hint of sarcasm in your term of "fine people of the US Military".
They are fine men and women who do far more than most Americans. Not just by fighting for the ideals that this nation was founded on but by helping & supporting their fellow Americans from coast to coast. And you ask your question as though 100% of the military turned out in droves and voted for only George Bush. They didn't, some voted for Gore, some voted for Kerry, some voted for 3rd party candidates. It is not as though he is dictating their votes. (Oh, that would be Saddam).
With every president, and every presidency comes both good and bad, things that will stick with them forever. Not 1 single president was perfect and all good. They are human, and they have faults. And good, bad and ugly, I would prefer this President and all his faults leading our nation today (and most certainly leading up to and following 9/11) over Al Gore or John Kerry any day of the week. Not because they are democrats, but for what they saw for America's future and our military. Gore, because he had no use for it, and Kerry, because he turned his back on his military past except for when it was convenient for him.
2007-02-23 19:41:18 · answer #4 · answered by picture . . . perfect 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because we do not care about your partisan political BS.
Since you obviously have not figured this out - let me explain something to you. The people in the military simply do not care about whether or not any particular political candidate went to Vietnam.
The only people who care about what you just asked are the people who will vote for a Democratic candidate - no matter what the qualifications.
2007-02-24 05:44:17 · answer #5 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its not "well established" as you claim. If you look at usatoday.com, april 2004, President Bush's military records were released and it shows that he wasn't AWOL as the dumb Libs claim. But they only want facts that support their hate filled minds.
2007-02-23 19:31:16 · answer #6 · answered by jonn449 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Where is your honor and dignity? What did you ever do for this country? You ***** and complain and look for ways to pick fights and bring people down. go be a troll somewhere else.
2007-02-23 19:28:19 · answer #7 · answered by the Animal 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
our Commander IN Chief was never charged with that so why do you say it like its a proven crime?....go harp on Taco Bill Clintons PROVEN crimes...
2007-02-23 19:21:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's now well established?
Oh pulease....
2007-02-23 19:21:51 · answer #9 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
What a great leader.....not!
2007-02-23 19:28:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋