Liberals and democrats here in Yahoo Q and A like to call George Bush a "chicken hawk". They claim he avoided Vietnam service by joining the Air National Guard, yet has no problem sending troops to fight and die in Iraq. Okay........
So then what was Clinton? Clinton NEVER EVEN SERVED in the military, but had no problem sending ill-equiped Army Rangers to die in Somalia in 1993-94, sending troops to Rwanda in July 1994, sending troops to Haiti in September 1994, invading Bosnia in December 1995, sending US sailors into harms way to maneuver off the coast of China in 1996 as a threat to Beijing, and firing cruise missiles at suspected chemical weapons sites in Iraq in December 1998! So if George Bush is a "chicken hawk" then what was Bill Clinton?
2007-10-06
04:17:39
·
35 answers
·
asked by
?
5
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
I have provided FACTS regarding Clinton's lack of military service and the troops he sent into harms way during his presidency. Calling me a liar doesn't change that! Sorry! Nice try!
2007-10-06
04:27:43 ·
update #1
Hey! Don't make fun of their "Golden Goose".... Although if they look a little closer they will see it's not golden... more of a cowardly yellow....
2007-10-06 04:40:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by That Guy 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Clinton was and is a well informed leader, not a stooge for the trans-national corporations, the Oil Mafia and the Jesus freak right...like George Bush. It would have been to Clinton's advantage to have served, but since he had a high number in the draft he was never actually called. He took his exemptions and waited his turn. Had he been called, he would have gone the same way thousands of other young men of the time did. In the context of the times his military adventures in various countries during his presidency were all short term, legitimate and for the most part an effective use of military power. In the end, whether or not either of these two 'served' up to any particular expectations isn't really the issue. The issue is the current occupation of Iraq....at this point 2/3 of America are convinced that this is a situation that never should have happened and having happened has been handled incompetently with zero expectation of a positive outcome. Ad hominum arguments aside, the Bush administration got us into a war with no natural stopping place, using borrowed money and for mostly phoney reasons...like the non-existant WMDs. The difference between these two men is that Bill Clinton knew what he was doing, and George Bush has no clue!
2007-10-06 04:49:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by Noah H 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Chickenhawk n. A person enthusiastic about war, provided someone else fights it; particularly when that enthusiasm is undimmed by personal experience with war; most emphatically when that lack of experience came in spite of ample opportunity in that person’s youth.
Well, it seems to me that bushit and the rest of the republicant chickenhawks are the ones sending other people's kids off to kill and be killed (seen any kids of proponents of the war in Iraq wearing uniforms recently?).
I don't think Clinton has been beating the drum for Iraq. I don't listen to dippy bushit, since he has nothing to say that is worth listening to, but rumor has it he is all for fighting for oil, er excuse me, fighting for something in Iraq.
We are not in Somalia - the US pulled out. Seems to me that some folks think Bosnia was a success.
How many people died under Clinton's watch? How many people died under dipsh*t's sleepy time? Not counting the folks in the twin towers, how many in the US military have died for bushit's bs?
The current misadministration is made up of chickenhawks, bent on turning the US into a model of the former soviet union (been spied on by the NSA lately? Probably!).
I volunteered for the USMC, I volunteered to go to Vietnam. I spent 13 months here. I volunteered to come back. And I got out after 2 years, 6 months and 10 days because I couldn't serve a full 2nd "rotation". I will call bushit and any of his supporters chickenhawks - unless they can show me a DD-214 with some active duty time beyond reserves boot camp.
Bushit and the cowards are calling for continued fighting in everywhere. Are his supporters signing up? No. Are his/their kids signing up? No. Are they all chickenhawks - you bet, you chickenhawk *.
2007-10-06 05:05:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by Sp II Guzzi 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The troops in Somalia had been sent there by George Bush,the troops in Rwanda were there to observe a cease fire,there was minimal activity in Haiti,we were not involved in ground operations in the former Yugoslavia,and maneuvers and missile strikes,like the rest of your list,does not equate to the illegal aggressive war of choice Mr.Bush is waging in Iraq.
2007-10-06 04:43:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Felon, liar, hypocrite, thief. Just for starters.
http://breakthechain.org/exclusives/clintondraft.html
first felon pardoned (by Carter Jan 21, 1977)
http://freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes
comments on Iraq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_(controversy)
There are alot more if you Google
*Nearly 4,ooo troops alone killed
NY Sun Heroes & Cowards
Clinton-Executive Orders
The Body Count
Rose Law Firm
Media Matters (marooned on marin)
Iraq 1998/1997 Operation Desert Fox
TWO for one. My hope is dead duck (in the literal sense-retired and gone away, not harmed ), drowned in the pool
of deceptions played against American's and the World.
DO half these people realize they have been duped by the Propaganda Machine here? Man it's scary!
2007-10-06 04:58:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mele Kai 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Bush=Chickenhawk
Clinton=Just Chicken
2007-10-06 08:12:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by ♥ Mel 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Not only did Clinton not serve, he DODGED and went to Canada. Just another of the hypocracies of the Liberals. OOOOOH but military service wont be an issue now since hillary is running but it was an issue with Bush.
Not only did he send our boys into Somali but when the going got tough he pulled them out, which showed the somali bastards that we can be beat, when we should have just leveled that town.
Clinton is more a politician and a diplomat... He'd rather file subpeonas and arraignments then actually pursue terrorists and Hillary is no different. Those kinda of liberal trash politicians will let Iran produce nuclear weapons and probably destroy israel and still not do anything about it except file grievances with the UN but since the UN is antisemetic and IRAN is probably on the Human Rights council nothing will get done.
The UN is a joke, Hillary Clinton is dangerous for this country.
Clinton was more responsible for 9/11 than Bush ever could have been. Especially since he did NOTHING after the WTC was hit the first time.
I think the offical word for Clinton is Liberal Hippy Douche.
2007-10-06 04:25:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Steven S 3
·
8⤊
6⤋
Turkey Buzzard
2007-10-06 04:39:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by hawk_barry 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Clinton was a draft dodger who had to be pardoned by that other genius, Jimmyearl Carter.
2007-10-06 04:53:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well, Bush isn't a chicken hawk. He went after the terrorists who killed over 3000 people for no reason.
Clinton did nothing when we had many terrorist attacks on America. But, if people want to call Bush a chicken hawk, then no one has invented a name lesser than that to call a cowardly person such as Clinton. The best I can come up with is cockroach. How's that?
2007-10-06 04:30:19
·
answer #10
·
answered by xenypoo 7
·
4⤊
5⤋
Skirt Stalker
2007-10-06 04:20:22
·
answer #11
·
answered by WC 7
·
5⤊
2⤋