»

[Fade]

Funny how fast they change their minds when it starts to cost them money. :-o

Story

[whabang]

Monuments over deserters. Tsk.

[cecilia]

On Saturday, CanWest reported that the largest combat veterans' group in the U.S. has asked President George W. Bush to voice its displeasure over the proposed statue to the Canadian government.

i think it's very funny someone wants the opinion of a person who escaped 'Nam the way the rich get to do it.
Instead of going to canada, bush went in the National Guard and then AWOL.

[redrumloa]

You'd think Canada would have done this during the Clinton administration when draft dodging was PC.

[KennyR]

I can't think of a better monument to draft dodgers than electing one as President.

Besides which, apart from the situation where the country is in danger, what's the problem with being a consciencious objector (ie. draft dodger in militarist right wing parlance)? Your country wouldn't die for you. Wars tend to only be to get rich and powerful people more rich and powerful, and I won't kill or die for that. It takes a very strong willed person to dodge the draft and accept the abuse they would get for being consciencious objectors. So what if the people who did go to some political war suffer and you don't? That's their bad luck - don't go to political war. A country doesn't thank the dead or the horribly maimed except by meaningless ceremony anyway. Wow, that really makes up for the tiny pensions given to bereaved families and permenantly disabled veterans.

The only real problem I have with draft dodgers are the brazen hypocrites, who, after having escaped a war, then expect other people to go fight one for them. Anyone who votes for such a person has no right to be critical of draft dodgers anywhere, any time. Ever.

[Tigger]

KennyR wrote:

The only real problem I have with draft dodgers are the brazen hypocrites, who, after having escaped a war, then expect other people to go fight one for them. Anyone who votes for such a person has no right to be critical of draft dodgers anywhere, any time. Ever.

I agree Kenny, so everyone that voted for draft dodging Clinton (and his Canadian and Euro fans) should just shut up about Bush serving his country in the National Guard, especially since Bush would never would have been drafted, as I have covered a bunch of times before.
-Tig

[whabang]

How is it that a candidate's military background can matter so much?
Wouldn't it be more important discussing the candidates' politics instead? :-?

[ltstanfo]

whabang wrote:
How is it that a candidate's military background can matter so much?
Wouldn't it be more important discussing the candidates' politics instead? :-?

It doesn't work that way in this country Whabang (sadly). Our politics inevitably dredge up political "mud" of the worst kind during an election...whether it is real or not (both parties). To the best of my observation, it has always been that way here and unless you are willing to be dragged into this kind of process, don't run for office. It happens routinely here from Federal down to local politics.

As for military service, many people here feel that unless a candidate for President has served in the military, he should not be president since he is the ultimate "commander and chief" of all US armed forces. Unless there is some common thread there (from prior service) the thought is that they cannot really understand what the soldier is going through or have their respect.

Regards,
ltstanfo

[KennyR]

whabang wrote:
How is it that a candidate's military background can matter so much?
Wouldn't it be more important discussing the candidates' politics instead?

It's relevant. Bush is the one who says he's trying to stop dictators and bring democracy to the world - using other people's lives. It sort of has a hollow ring when Bush himself was hiding in the National Guard rather than fighting Ho Chi Minh. His family wanted to give him the prestige of being a soldier, without actually the nasty risky bit where you might get killed, and with all those common people too!

The fact he's now attacking Kerry for this subject shows what kind of a person Bush is - a grade A hypocrite. Now that's a startling level for hypocrisy, even for a politician...hell, it's startling even for a born-again Christian! At least Clinton had the balls to just jump the draft and take the consequences, and Kerry had the balls to actually go. Bush didn't have the balls to do either, and should crawl back under that rock and go back to the feckless aristocratic slime he came from. Such people don't deserve to wipe a*ses, far less rule countries.

NOTE: Edited by ltstanfo on 092704. Reason: language.

[Thellenbow]

ltstanfo wrote:

It doesn't work that way in this country Whabang (sadly). Our politics inevitably dredge up political "mud" of the worst kind during an election...whether it is real or not (both parties). To the best of my observation, it has always been that way here and unless you are willing to be dragged into this kind of process, don't run for office. It happens routinely here from Federal down to local politics.

As for military service, many people here feel that unless a candidate for President has served in the military, he should not be president since he is the ultimate "commander and chief" of all US armed forces. Unless there is some common thread there (from prior service) the thought is that they cannot really understand what the soldier is going through or have their respect.

Regards,
ltstanfo

Actually, the idea is to have a civilian in charge of the army so that he/she would not have a militaristic mentality. Also, the hope is to prevent the military from taking over the government. (Can you say, coup d’etat?)

[ltstanfo]

Thellenbow wrote:

Actually, the idea is to have a civilian in charge of the army so that he/she would not have a militaristic mentality. Also, the hope is to prevent the military from taking over the government. (Can you say, coup d’etat?)

A fair statement but don't forget that both Grant and Eisenhower were military Generals just prior to being elected to office. They were technically civilians but as both were military trained with long careers (including combat) they most certainly viewed their office with a military mindset. I do not dispute the "separation of powers" idea but since the two mentioned presidents (particularly Eisenhower) were in office, having served in the US military is always a "plus" during an election.

As for a military coup d-etat, highly improbable (I want to say "no way" but nothing is certain in life except for death and taxes....hehe). As our armed forces are by design commanded by civilians (Secretaries of Defense and branch of military, Senate - approval for general's promotions, and ultimately the President), the Constitution and Bill of Rights would have to be thrown away. And the one thing all readers of the coffee house have learned about US citizens is that we really hold these documents as the basis for everything we do / accept / tolerate.

Regards,
ltstanfo

Regards,
ltstanfo

[Tigger]

KennyR wrote:

It's relevant. Bush is the one who says he's trying to stop dictators and bring democracy to the world - using other people's lives. It sort of has a hollow ring when Bush himself was hiding in the National Guard rather than fighting Ho Chi Minh. His family wanted to give him the prestige of being a soldier, without actually the nasty risky bit where you might get killed, and with all those common people too!

Bush would NEVER have been drafted Kenny, if he not been drafted and not joined the National Guard would you feel better about him?? Kerry would have been drafted, a fact Kerry knew when he "joined" the navy, he joined it so he could pick the service he went into, instead of the draft board choosing for him. We have had this conversation before Kenny, you should have understood it then.
-Tig

[Glaucus]

Thanks to good old G. W. Bush, Canada will be getting a nice little population boost over the next few years:

Flight from the fight
Two American soldiers have deserted, claiming asylum in Canada rather than serve in Iraq. They argue that the war is illegal under international law

Brandon Hughey is a teenager living among strangers, thousands of miles from his friends, family and home in San Angelo, Texas. The 18-year-old is one of two American servicemen who recently deserted their units and fled to Canada to claim asylum as refugees. "We plan to argue that the war in Iraq is illegal under international law and that I have a right not to choose to participate," he says.

Canada accepting American Refugees? Now that's funny!!!

- Mike

[KennyR]

Tigger wrote:
Bush would NEVER have been drafted Kenny, if he not been drafted and not joined the National Guard would you feel better about him?? Kerry would have been drafted, a fact Kerry knew when he "joined" the navy, he joined it so he could pick the service he went into, instead of the draft board choosing for him. We have had this conversation before Kenny, you should have understood it then.

That changes nothing. Bush is still trying to claim the prestige and respect of a soldier who served his country, a war president who did what all the people he sends off to war did. He certainly doesn't deserve such respect. He was NEVER going to actually go to war, and to try to use this against a man who did, stinks even more than his "Iraq has WMDs" and "Saddam supports Al-Queda" claims. The very fact that you can apologise for Bush is beyond contempt.

[Wilse]

@Tig:

Bush would NEVER have been drafted

Then why did his daddy go to so much trouble to get him into 'Air Canada'?