Military men, read this!

For those who have served thier country, how do you feel about this website?

http://www.talion.com/georgebush.html

George W. Bush evaded military duties while thousands of Americans — more patriotic and less privileged than George W. Bush — were dying in Vietnam.

It seems to me that good soldiers should spite this man.

For the record, during my 8 years in the Marine Corps I wasn't always the "perfect Marine" by any means. Even with Naval and Presidential Commendations, I had some moments and did some things I hope are NEVER never available to public eyes. I was young and a bit of a "party-animal" when in the service, much like most accounts of George Jr.
I really don't hold middle-aged men accountable for bad choices and moves made when they were young. People change far too much as they age. Become wiser, smarter, and more responsible.

Originally posted by Ranger_X
For those who have served thier country, how do you feel about this website?

http://www.talion.com/georgebush.html



It seems to me that good soldiers should spite this man.

Bill Clinton went to Oxford to dodge the draft, and then was seen protesting the war. What does that say about our former president? Also, you do know that a national guard can be called up to go to war. Or do you?

Originally posted by Pick


Bill Clinton went to Oxford to dodge the draft, and then was seen protesting the war. What does that say about our former president? Also, you do know that a national guard can be called up to go to war. Or do you?


Well good on him!!!!!! It's good to see a man who can stand up for what he believes in. THAT is the man America needs for president :D

Originally posted by Jimster



Well good on him!!!!!! It's good to see a man who can stand up for what he believes in. THAT is the man America needs for president :D

Oh, so we should have a draft-dodger as President? O.K. Maybe in New Zealadn, but not in the U.S.

Originally posted by Pick


Oh, so we should have a draft-dodger as President? O.K. Maybe in New Zealadn, but not in the U.S.

:hehehe: You're quite ignorant of these things you know :)

Originally posted by Cbass


:hehehe: You're quite ignorant of these things you know :)

How is that. He said we should have a draft dodger as President.

Clinton like many democrats hasn't one moral fiber in his body. It took a Republican to bring down the Berlin Wall. Ronald Reagan made certain before he left office that the US would be the sole remaining superpower on this planet. Bush might not be as good a president but I'd leave the USA if Gore had been elected. No poseysniffing treehugging presidents for me

Originally posted by Pick


How is that. He said we should have a draft dodger as President.

You'll find almost all US politicians are draft dodgers, through one form or another. Rare examples stand out such as Bush Sr., who actually saw combat.

G.W. Bush on the other hand deserted his Air National Guard post during time of war, to go work on a political campaign, never to return. His father managed to protect him from any reprimand of course :rolleyes:

Al Gore went to Vietnam as a press officer, which is practically draft dodging, but at least he went.

Attending a university is not dodging the draft by any means. Clinton did not attend Oxford for that reason, he attended Oxford because he had excellent grades, and was a Rhode scholar.

Bill Clinton used his office in the Whitehouse to get a blowjob. Give me a break. That man doesn't have one single moral fiber. He's lied, cheated and stolen his way to where he is. Hell he was responsible for escorted drug deliveries to his home state of Arkansas

Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
Bill Clinton used his office in the Whitehouse to get a blowjob. Give me a break. That man doesn't have one single moral fiber. He's lied, cheated and stolen his way to where he is. Hell he was responsible for escorted drug deliveries to his home state of Arkansas

Hmmm,so I take it you are a Republican then....;)

care to expand on these claims,and how he got away without being impeached?

Actually he was impeached by vote which was never carried through. Clinton was good for the US economy but he did more damage in the US then good.

Yes I am Republican

Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
Actually he was impeached by vote which was never carried through. Clinton was good for the US economy but he did more damage in the US then good.

Yes I am Republican


Care to elaborate on this "damage"???? :rolleyes:

Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
Actually he was impeached by vote which was never carried through. Clinton was good for the US economy but he did more damage in the US then good.

Yes I am Republican

well,that is half of the answer that Iasked for,and it could have been more simply put by admitting that he was not impeached.



That man doesn't have one single moral fiber. He's lied, cheated and stolen his way to where he is. Hell he was responsible for escorted drug deliveries to his home state of Arkansas



now perhaps you might care to elaborate on these points?

Originally posted by Jimster



Well good on him!!!!!! It's good to see a man who can stand up for what he believes in. THAT is the man America needs for president :D

Bush is standing up for what he believes in. I don't need anybody to elaborate on this.

While I was still in the USAF we were "assigned" Escort duty to foreign flights from south american into Arkansas, Once the escorted flight had landed we were to return to our designated bases. While I did not personally witness the drugs being offloaded from these aircraft I have spoken to persons both military and civilian that were involved in offloading those aircraft that there were drugs in large amounts. One of many reasons I do not like Clinton not to mention he was totally against keeping our Military strong other then supporting his habits

Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
Clinton like many democrats hasn't one moral fiber in his body. It took a Republican to bring down the Berlin Wall. Ronald Reagan made certain before he left office that the US would be the sole remaining superpower on this planet. Bush might not be as good a president but I'd leave the USA if Gore had been elected. No poseysniffing treehugging presidents for me

To be fair, there were many good democratic presidents. This doesn't have to be a bipartisan issue. Try to use examples of what people have done rather than attacking a whole wing of the government. I ask this of liberals and conservatives alike.

Originally posted by Jimster



Care to elaborate on this "damage"???? :rolleyes:

Selling nuclear technological information to China.

To be fair, there were many good democratic presidents.


Ok I'll allow one IMO. FDR was a great President. JFK was lousy and while the loss of him at such a young age was horrible and always seems to be brought up I've found the Kennedy's all way to liberal. Joe Kennedy wanted to side with the Nazi's.

Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
While I was still in the USAF we were "assigned" Escort duty to foreign flights from south american into Arkansas, Once the escorted flight had landed we were to return to our designated bases. While I did not personally witness the drugs being offloaded from these aircraft I have spoken to persons both military and civilian that were involved in offloading those aircraft that there were drugs in large amounts.


And yet when Clinton was on the back foot with the Monica Lewinsky business,nobody stepped forward to put this information in front of the world?That kind of information is worth huge money from the gutter press,and yet nobody wants to take a stand against drugs,dob in a criminal,and make money?


sorry,does not add up.

Originally posted by Prelewd


Bush is standing up for what he believes in. I don't need anybody to elaborate on this.


That murder for oil and empire building is a good thing???? :confused:

Originally posted by Jimster



That murder for oil and empire building is a good thing???? :confused:

I said I didn't need anybody to elaborate on this one. You didn't necessitate a good thing either, you just said a President that stands up for what he believes in. Bush stands up for what he believes in, good or bad.

By the way, are you SURE that those are Bush's motives?

Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i

Ok I'll allow one IMO. FDR was a great President.
Actually, FDR's pyramid scheme called "social security" is a financial monster in the making... The "great society" was a horrible response to a temporary national crisis that will haunt us in years to come as the "baby-boomers" start retiring. Imagine, all these "live-now, pay-later, beg-borrow-or-steal-to-buy-that-perfect-yuppie-life" idiots have the lowest investment rate in US history. How many stories have we all heard of where these selfish twits borrow or even take money from their PARENTS to buy an Explorer or Expedition?
As they retire they will ask for, and probably get, more and more entitlements as they didn't prepare for the future. FDR screwed-us royal!!

Originally posted by Jimster

That murder for oil and empire building is a good thing???? :confused:
If we wanted Iraq's oil that badly we would have seized control of it in 1991. We were certainly in the position to do so. And, since we haven't purchased oil from Iran since 1979 I'd like you to back this theory...
As for this "empire" I don't see much evidence for this claim either...
:rolleyes:

Actually, FDR's pyramid scheme called "social security" is a financial monster in the making... The "great society" was a horrible response to a temporary national crisis that will haunt us in years to come as the "baby-boomers" start retiring. Imagine, all these "live-now, pay-later, beg-borrow-or-steal-to-buy-that-perfect-yuppie-life" idiots have the lowest investment rate in US history. How many stories have we all heard of where these selfish twits borrow or even take money from their PARENTS to buy an Explorer or Expedition?




Well you certainly made a point, Good I'd have to say not quite,
First off the SSA was in very good shape until the latter 1950's
During the cold war President Eisenhower "borrowed" money from SSI to put into the general fund. Repayment terms were agreed on by congress. However when JFK became president he suspended repayments to SSI from the general fund as did LBJ. SSI is a good thing because it has assisted (not near enough for many unfortunately) alot of people. While I think it is a nessacary evil it does need a drastic overhaul where only the people by a majority of vote should be allowed to make changes to it. Not the peoples representitives but the people themselves who pay into it.

Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
Clinton was good for the US economy
Not to flame, but name just one economic policy of Clinton's that did anything positive for our economy...
Answer - none...
Clinton passed the largest tax hike in US history, and lost congress the following year for doing so. Clinton started taxing SSI, pensions, and investments like no previous president. Fortunately he, like Bush Sr., was still riding the coat-tails of Reagan's tax revolution. Our economy, spurred mostly by booming technology (which was mostly financed successfully through "junk-bonds"), grew much more rapidly than government spending.
Economics 101 -
Money in private hands - grows economies
Money in government hands - drains economies

Not to flame, but name just one economic policy of Clinton's that did anything positive for our economy...

That I agree with 100% after rereading what I had typed
I'm a diehard Republican. I'm always right wing and I always stand firmly with them. Even Nixon. He did much more good then bad but unfortunately that won't even be remembered now

Originally posted by Murco
...As for this "empire" I don't see much evidence for this claim either...:rolleyes: See This Post (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?postid=863223#post863223)

You really think that this is accurate? I think the first of his links was a hoax and the second was pure conspiracy theory...

Originally posted by Murco
You really think that this is accurate? I think the first of his links was a hoax and the second was pure conspiracy theory... Oh really?

Do you think this is a hoax:
The Project for the New American Century (PANC) (http://www.newamericancentury.org/aboutpnac.htm) ???

Go on, click on the names there and see who they are. But don't dig too deep will you, you might not like what you find.

This is quoted from their "2nd Statement on Post War Iraq" dated March 28 2003 (it's on their site).
Administration of post-war Iraq should from the beginning include not only Americans but officials from those countries committed to our goals in Iraq. Bringing different nationalities into the administrative organization is important because it allows us to draw on the expertise others have acquired from their own previous peacekeeping and reconstruction efforts. It will also facilitate closer and more effective ties between the security forces in post-war Iraq and those charged with administrating the political and economic rebuilding of Iraq.

International support and participation in the post-Iraq effort would be much easier to achieve if the UN Security Council were to endorse such efforts. The United States should therefore seek passage of a Security Council resolution that endorses the establishment of a civilian administration in Iraq, authorizes the participation of UN relief and reconstruction agencies, welcomes the deployment of a security and stabilization force by NATO allies, and lifts all economic sanctions imposed following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait a decade ago. Hardly have to even read between the lines here - they are very open about it. They have no intention of leaving Iraq after the war - ever. Just add another US military base to the list of military presence around the world.

A country only a few centuries old is going to "persuade" the rest of the world to see things their way. Didn't the Romans do something like this once?

Optimistically, it sounds like they are keeping a close eye on post war Iraq to make sure it gets rebuilt the right way.


I can see the pessimistic answers to my statement already..

Originally posted by Prelewd
Optimistically, it sounds like they are keeping a close eye on post war Iraq to make sure it gets rebuilt the right way.

I can see the pessimistic answers to my statement already.. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink...................:D:D:D

Originally posted by Prelewd
Optimistically, it sounds like they are keeping a close eye on post war Iraq to make sure it gets rebuilt the right way.


I can see the pessimistic answers to my statement already..

If nations were run along the lines of what is honest,and decent and morally right,Id be optimistic.
Unfortunately most major democracies are run by self-interested, greedy, cynical, manipulative shitbags.Percentage points in opinion polls matter to them far more than people,particularly if those people live a long way away and can't vote them out of office..........

Originally posted by taranaki


If nations were run along the lines of what is honest,and decent and morally right,Id be optimistic.
Unfortunately most major democracies are run by self-interested, greedy, cynical, manipulative shitbags.Percentage points in opinion polls matter to them far more than people,particularly if those people live a long way away and can't vote them out of office..........

Most major democracies, or everything that is ran? From a business to a country. Undoubtably, there are exceptions.. too bad the bad can't be the exception though.

Originally posted by Jimster



Well good on him!!!!!! It's good to see a man who can stand up for what he believes in. THAT is the man America needs for president :D

Yea, a president that puts sexual pleasure over his country, and then publicly denies it. That's the leader for america. And Bush is the one standing up for what he believes in.

Originally posted by T4 Primera
Hardly have to even read between the lines here - they are very open about it. They have no intention of leaving Iraq after the war - ever.
I think you've just found another hoax site. Bill Crystal is a decent political editorialist but hardly someone to lead such an organization. It's "motives" are also far too spelled-out for this to be genuine. Such an organization would operate far under the radar of public view. This silly conspiracy theory nonsense is so absurd. Our government, like most, is so disjointed it can't get people on the same page for much of anything, much less a nefarious plot for world dominance...