Indecision 2004- the Campaign for the White House-

Does anyone here even support the Vietnam war? And why all the "Bush is a draft dodger"? So was Clinton you know? Don't hear you complaining about him. But that's probably because this site is mostly democrat when it comes to politics.
 
Tell me Paladin Solo: Why do you support the Vietnam War and then I'll tell you why I don't. Now this is going to require some thought and analysis, are you up to the challenge?
 
I don't support it. I never said I did. I was just bringing that up since you seem to like to call Bush a draft dodger in a war you didn't support. You would have bashed him even more if he did go to that war. See my point?
 
No, we wouldn't have bashed him. We would've bashed him if he thought it was a good war.
Vietnam was, in its intents, perhaps a decent war(they were trying to prevent North Vietnam from usurping South Vietnam), but it turned out to be hideous. Woohoo.
By the way, I'm not bashing him because he was a draft dodger, but I do think that those who supported the Vietnam war, and such, should realise what Bush has done there. Since, for as far as I know, most Replublicans have supported that war, I don't see how he became president.
 
Apparently not, and way to dodge the question.

I don't support the Vietnam War (or conflict as the military calls it) because there was no clear cut purpose for the war, nor was there a clear cut exit strategy. Removing the communist presence from South Vietnam does not qualify as a clear cut purpose in my mind. I also do not support the war beause we entered combet there under false pretenses, namely the Gulf of Tonkin affair which has subsequently been completely debunked. I also do not support it because of my belief that Vietnam was used as a scapegoat by the US government to support a massive military-industrial complex buildup whose ripples echo even today.

Bush, Clinton, and Dean all dodged the draft and Vietnam, IMO, for the record. Clinton by means that I am not familiar with. Bush did it by joining an air national guard squadron, which included the sons of many wealthy people, and subsequently going AWOL for 18 months. Dean did in on a medical deferral.

With that said PS, I find your ability (or lack thereof) to pigeonhole people to one issue or other, liberal or conservative, democrat or republican, a disturbing result of media manipulation. I am not a Democrat, but I often vote Democratic. I also am amazed by your insinuation that everyone here is a liberal Democrat to be luducrous. If you've been paying atttention instead of pigeonholing people you'd realize that there is seldom any agreement on these forums about anything! From guns to child porn, the entire spectrum of viewpoints (maybe not on child porn, but I digress) are represented.

It is this very disagreement that makes this place interesting, and your attitude stands out as the exception that proves the rule that NMA is a very cosmopolitan place with a multitude of interesting viewpoints.

I apologize for derailing this thread. Splitting may be in order.

Thoughts?
 
Paladin Solo said:
Does anyone here even support the Vietnam war? And why all the "Bush is a draft dodger"? So was Clinton you know? Don't hear you complaining about him. But that's probably because this site is mostly democrat when it comes to politics.
Click to expand...

What Murdoch said.

Also, you did hear about Clinton being a "draft-dodger" when he was in power. But the last time Clinton was in power was four years ago, so it's not exactly a hot topic anymore. Make sense? It's not that nobody thinks about it, it's just that it's completely irrelevant nowadays except for when (from what I've seen) people try to justify Bush doing it.
 
First off, I wasn't trying to justify Bush's decision to be a draft dodger. I was just wondering why people keep bringing it up. Since it seems that the majority of Americans and almost all non-Americans don't support that war, you still find that you like to say Bush is a draft dodger/puss/chicken. That would be like me saying that our military is evil for going into Iraq. But yet, that would be redundant since I support the war.

Second, Murdoch. What pigeonholding?

I also find some things you say ludicrous and misleading too Murdoch. But that's for another PM.
 
The issue of dodging the draft for anyone who did or didn't do it is brought up because it is a reflection of their character. The issue is brought up just as often for Clinton, or Dean, or anyone who was of the right age at that time in American history, not just Bush.

Paladin Solo said:
Second, Murdoch. What Pigeon holing? If you always vote democrat, then why would you consider yourself a republican?
Click to expand...

Pidgeonholing is a way off stating that you are stereotyped into a certain group. Check this page: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pigeonhole and the fourth entry.

And then, what? :help: :eyebrow:
I stated that I am not a democrat. I consider myself an independent voter. I believe you imply that there is no such thing as being neither a Democrat or Republican. This is not the case. It just so happens that I often vote for the democratic candidate, as I vote the lesser of the two evils. This statement by you further confirms my belief of your lack of understanding on the subject of politics. If this is in error, please let me know.

And for the record, we have never exchanged PMs, PS.


EDIT: In addition PS, don't not ever put words into my mouth by saying that I think our military is evil! I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT!
I believe that the reasons for going to war were wrong, but that is a disagreement with the Commander-in-Chief, not the armed forces. I have the utmost respect for anyone's desire to enter the military, and honor the armed forces in general for everything they do, including the liberation and occupation of Iraq. The actions of the military has been professional, serious and compassionate, IMO, and deserve everyone's respect, especially from those who disagree with their reasons for doing so. Disagreeing with Gulf War II is not the same thing as disagreeing with those who did the fighting.

The military does whatever the government tells them, and whether I disagree with that position does not affect my respect for the military, just those who gave the orders. This can be said for why I disagree with Vietnem as well. I respect all Vietnam vets as much as I respect all servicemen and women who have served with honor.
 
DUDE! WTF? I SAID THAT WOULD BE LIKE ME SAYING THAT! NOT YOU!

And I repeat my question. What pigeonholding? All I said was that this site seems to be mostly democratic. And I view the constant Bush bashing a democratic tactic.
 
Paladin Solo said:
DUDE! WTF? I SAID THAT WOULD BE LIKE ME SAYING THAT! NOT YOU!

And I repeat my question. What pigeonholding? All I said was that this site seems to be mostly democratic. And I view the constant Bush bashing a democratic tactic.
Click to expand...

The pigeonholing you use is by equating, through illogical means, that because this site is in support of democrats (which it is most certainly not) it only bashes Bush. Or in essence that because I disagree with the war in Iraq I am a democrat Bush-hating liberal.

Bah. You're misdirections have me all confused. Too bad you cannot debate in a logical manner, or we might get somehwere.
 
I never said just because someone disagrees with the war in Iraq that makes you an democrat Bush-hating liberal. I said if you bash him all the time, than that makes you a democrat Bush-hating liberal. Not in those words exactly but you pretty much summed it up.
 
I never said just because someone disagrees with the war in Iraq that makes you an democrat Bush-hating liberal. I said if you bash him all the time, than that makes you a democrat Bush-hating liberal. Not in those words exactly but you pretty much summed it up.p
Click to expand...
I bash Bush, but:
A) I'm not a Democrat(although I'd vote democrat if I were American, simply because I have to choose between two evils)
B) I'm not a liberal either.
That's all stereotyping, and it's stupid as well. Start attacking the arguments of people, instead of the people, PS.
 
I am unclear on this. How is getting paid for a job mean that he actually showed up? Couldn't he have a buddy just punch in the clock that says he's there?

Hell that used to happen all the time where I used to work.

Someone saying "never saw him" would provide me better evidence.
 
Meh, I don't know. Can someone who has served in the armed forces, prefereably the Air National Guard, tell me if punching someone else's clock is a normal occurance? Seems to me that this would be a disciplinary offense. As such I would tend to believe the report, even given who filed it.

This won't change my opinion on Bush's military service however. If he had nothingto hide, why not just fully disclose everything in 2000, and not at the dogging of reporters? Its not like people weren't asking these questions in 2000, and the truth is often the best policy, like in regards to military service.

Then the conspiracy theorist in me sees Kerry, a decorated war veteran as the new democratic front-runner instead of medical-release Dean and wonder how much more of this was politically motivated.
 
Agh, I knew this would happen. This is proof that he served his time satisfactorily, and officially. And I would imagine that showing up and punching a hole in your card is a little off in the ways the military takes role calls. But, of course, I don't know exactly how they do it since I am not yet in the military. Perhaps someone like Elly or and old vet could tell you.

And Ozrat, I'm sure they had this proof before, just they never felt more obligated to show it now then before, since democrats like to make a big deal out of it instead of focusing on more pressing issues. And no, I am not stating you are one.
 
Wesley Clark dropped out of the race earlier.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&e=2&u=/ap/20040211/ap_on_el_pr/clark

I think Clark could have an important role in the eventual democratic nominee's plan to win the white house. I for one am glad he droped out; I am not comfortable with what I perceive as his inexperience at domestic policy issues and didn't want him as the nominee.

Basing your perception of the world on your military experience does not translate into political reality any better than basing it upon business (like Perot did). From what I remember of Eisenhower's presidency he didn't seem to base his election on the military. Although he did have the whole "saving the free world" thing going for him!
 
Damn, I wanted Clark to win. I think direct political experience is overrated, as long as you have a good team around you. Besides, he was a Rhodes Scholar majoring in Economics and Public Policy, so its not like he would be clueless on domestic issues. I guess I'll pull for Edwards- kinda wish he won Oklahoma now.

I also hope no one is basing who they want to be president on what they were doing in the Vietnam war. It's an issue, sure, but a minor one.

Btw, Murdoch, your post almost makes it seem like you were around during Eisenhower's presidency. :) (Of course, you never know, maybe he was)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top