I was recently looking at the New Hamshire Gazette-Hannity -Limbaugh-Cheney on and on-in fact there is a "Chickenhawk" deck of cards-amazing that these tough guys did not serve. I know Clinton did not serve....blah blah but just look at the facts-a bunch of cowards took us to war how insulting.
2007-03-23 02:13:47 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I find it pathetic when I see you criticizing people for not doing something that you failed to do yourself.
And people wonder why I regard liberals as hypocrites.
2007-03-23 02:27:38 · answer #1 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The standard liberal line of reasoning to try to shut up conservatives about he war is that if they did not serve then they cannot comment. If we apply that rule evenly then there should only be about 7 liberals nationally that can comment on the war.
Lets look at the wars that we were involved in in the 20th century and who got us into them:
WW-I Democrat
WW-II Democrat
Korea Democrat
Vietnam Democrat
Dominican Republic Democrat
Desert-1 (Iran) Democrat
Grenada Republican
Gulf War-I Republican
Somalia Democrat
Panama Democrat
Bosnia/Herzegovina Democrat (and still there)
Kosovo Democrat (and still there)
It seems like the chickenhawk cowards from the Democrats are the ones most likely to take us to war and the ones to involve us in wars that will cost us the most lives.
2007-03-23 02:24:10 · answer #2 · answered by permh20 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Given the inhabitants of the country contrasted to the type of human beings who populate the armed amenities... i might say that the veterans on listed right here are very small in numbers. I doubt that a large style of the human beings who easily ask that are even vets themselves. Its straightforward to conceal in the back of a video show and make own assaults or implications like that. And, with all admire, an armed provider background does not easily immediately make all people an authority on center eastern relatives and/or politics. a lot of neo-cons did not serve (Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Paul Bremer, Karl Rove... and so on) so as that argument does not make experience.
2016-10-19 10:09:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Name calling is pretty childish, don't you think?
When did Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, John Edwards, Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Barbara Boxer, and many more Democrats serve?
Not everyone serves in the Military. That doesn't mean they are less capable of leading.
As for going to war, the Democrats "Inconvienient Truth" is they had access to the same intelligence as the White House and they voted to go to war. Both parties have an equal number of members on the Intelligence Commitees. They see the same data as the White House. They report back to their membership.
Try some facts to further an argument, pointless rhetoric just
demonstrates immaturity and lack of thought, IMHO.
2007-03-23 02:26:59 · answer #4 · answered by Partisanshipsux 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
You guys bandy that neo-con title around quite often and I believe that none of you even know what it means.
A Neo-Con is someone who has abandoned liberal attitudes and ideas and has become a conservative in thought and action.
Now, knowing that, why would it surprise you that someone who's a Neo-con didn't serve in the military? Most people entering military service, do so directly from school so if someone was a liberal in their early years, chances are that they did not serve.
Stop and think before you start calling people rude names. As for me, I have been moderately conservative my entire life, and I enlisted in the Army directly after high school. I served in the Infantry in Vietnam. I can tell you from experience that the only troops we had who were unreliable were the liberals who were drafted and couldn't find a deferment to get out of it. We couldn't trust them then and I don't trust them now.
2007-03-23 02:25:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
NeoCon OIFVeteran. You can't a few people and call that a majority.
We all can't be heroes, someone has to sit on the curb and clap as we go by.
As a combat veteran I do not call out my supporters to fight, why should you. Do you also think that the coach and chearleaders for a football team should have to tackle 280lbs fullbacks just so they can support the team? You argument is illogical and honestly you not being a veteran, you have no ground to stand on to call those people out.
2007-03-23 02:38:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
really, and what percentage of neoliberals served?
Are you not aware that more than 90% of the military vote republican? Or are you just trying to sound like you have a point to make.
By the way, not only did clinton not serve, but he fled to canada to avoid the draft.
2007-03-23 02:18:37 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 1⤋
Very few politicians of any party have served in wars, because as a general rule it's pretty easy for rich kids to get out of it.
2007-03-23 02:21:44 · answer #8 · answered by Saint Bee 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
For the simple FACT that the majority of our Military votes Republican makes your question irrelevant.
2007-03-23 02:21:54 · answer #9 · answered by RUSH MAKES OBAMA CRY !! A LOT !! 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Limbaugh is not a neo-con. Do you even know what a neo-con is?
2007-03-23 02:19:08 · answer #10 · answered by Yak Rider 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋