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," Bush seems to have a problem meeting his commitments and following through with his duties.
2007-02-25 03:50:23 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Yeah, & here's the website:
http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm#vietnam
2007-02-25 04:23:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The answers are all over the board on this one. President Bush did not attend training during that time period and that is allowed. A National Guard soldier can be held for AWOL. If the soldier is not accounted for and on a units rolls, that falls under the parameters of being AWOL. A commander also has the ability to grant an excused absence at their discretion for any time period that they feel justified. We are discussing events from over 35 years ago now that have already cost some individuals their jobs, honor, and integrity because of jumping on the bandwagon with this issue. Jazmine, get over it. Nothing is going to be done with a situation that everyone wants to make more out of than what it is.
And by the way, you spelled Chief wrong.
Thanks for the two points.
2007-02-25 05:06:43 · answer #2 · answered by Bradford S 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, shes posted the same question 8 times in the last week.
And the answer is the same each time.
National guardsmen can not go AWOL.
The National Guard does not earn leave, so can not go absent without leave.
The National guard is NOT under the UCMJ, AWOL is a UJMC charge.
so to answer her question, I'm just fine about Bush's honorable service in the AF National Guard.
2007-02-25 04:31:56 · answer #3 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There are many legitimate reasons to oppose this president.
It seems foolish to me to resort to distortions of the truth to make a point.
Mr.Bush has clearly been exonerated of these charges and the persistence of the Bush haters in labeling the man a criminal or a liar only serves to make people like you look foolish and incapable of formulating a reasoned opinion.
Mr Bush has done a poor job in managing Iraq since the initial military successes.
He has done an abysmal job on protecting our borders.
He has also done some very good things.
Like Clinton before him, the truth is he is not as blame-free as his avid supporters contend, but he is certainly not the hayseed evil imbecile his detractors portray.
2007-02-25 04:08:42 · answer #4 · answered by Garrett S 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He had permission from his commanders so it was all legal. Strange that you should be rehashing all this stuff again. I do not understand your motive now, since GW is not running for political office. His commanders have testified that he met ALL commitments and performed all his duties. Another thing that may be of interest to you. He did nothing UNUSUAL for that time and that situation. Many others did these things. Get over it and stop acting like a duck on a june bug on any negative report about GW.
2007-02-25 03:59:22 · answer #5 · answered by just the facts 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Wow, Skippy, you have been a hectic little liar in the present day. Bush did no longer circulate AWOL. in case you hadn't heard, Dan quite have been given fired for attempting to unfold that lie with phoney information. and how some years have you ever served in the protection tension? Sod off, mate.
2016-12-14 05:22:23 · answer #6 · answered by keetan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It has come out in the past that many politicians, both Democrat and Republican, dodged their military duties somehow. As this story was big news four years ago, I feel the same way as I did about it then: It's no big surprise that ALL politicians lie and cover up things to get what they want.
2007-02-25 04:05:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No worse than having the previous commander in chief leave the country to avoid the draft, and having him make disparaging remarks about our military, including admitting that he loathed the military...I'm sure you can find some other reason to hate Bush, but this one has become VERY old!
2007-02-25 04:24:51 · answer #8 · answered by imadumas 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It was probably the most patriotic thing he could do. Did we REALLY need a coked out junkie flying a multi-million dollar air craft?
2007-02-25 03:56:54 · answer #9 · answered by Bobbie E 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Your assertion is not true. How many more times do you intend to post the same question using your many Yahoo IDs?
2007-02-25 03:57:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋