GWB won't be satisfied until this man, and others like him are dead.

This is pathetic. People wouldn't be doing this if the Iraq War was a war worth fighting and dying for rather than a war of agression to fulfill the PNAC.

Posted by member2586

* * * *
Nah. Nobody EVER tried to get out of a war before!!
LOL Tool.

RiR loves the sacrifice as long as he isn't the one doing it. For him it is all about stacking his money.

Botta was deployed to Afghanistan for about seven months in 2002. He then had three deployments to Iraq about a month in 2003, three months in 2004 and 15 days later that year....Army spokeswoman Maj. Cheryl Phillips noted that Army Reserve units deploy for 12 consecutive months, and that Botta had only accumulated about 10 nonconsecutive months of deployment. She also noted that Botta was under an eight-year service contract.

Seems like the guy doesn't have a case. If anything, the five deployments refect a sensitive military that instead of leaving him in Iraq and Afghanistan, was bringing him back to the US whenever they felt they could.

He knew the rules when he joined. If he didn't, it's his own fault. His decision, freely made.

Nah. Nobody EVER tried to get out of a war before!!
LOL Tool.

Posted by rightisright

Dick Cheney
Karl Rove
Mitch McConnell
Bill Frist
Trent Lott
Saxby Chambliss
Don Nickles
Rick Santorum
John Ashcroft
Richard Shelby
Spencer Abraham
John Engler
Newt Gingrich
Dick Armey
Tom Delay
John A. Boehner
Jack Kemp
Roy Blunt
Bob Ney
David Dreier
Tim Hutchison
Christopher Cox
Dana Rohrabacher
John M. McHugh
JC Watts
Vin Weber
Bob Barr
Mark Souder
Walter Jones
Katherine Harris

If Dick Cheney can suffer through five deferments then this guy can certainly handle his fifth deployment.

If Dick Cheney can suffer through five deferments then this guy can certainly handle his fifth deployment.

Posted by reinheitsgebot

FF

What a coward. This man should be stood up against a wall and shot. What's his problem? He's been to Iraq three times and Afghanistan once. So what? I'll bet he has several thousand miles logged with the airlines by now. Did Washington quit when his army was run out of New York and through the marshes of New Jersey? Did Napoleon quit when the Russians burned him out of Moscow? Did Audie Murphy quit because he had a toothache? NO! Embrace the opportunity to serve! Be a patriot! I would do the same if I was so inclined.

The war is a big lie for corporate profit. And on those grounds alone the military should refuse to fight.
And all of you armchair warriors on here, I was going to say pull your heads out of your asses, but on second thought keep them up there. Reality might be to big of a shock for you.
And yes! The CIA, and the secret military/industerial complex perpitrated 911 to get their war going.
And anyone that wants to start with the tin foil hat remarks, go ahead because you are the biggest fools of all.

It's really interesting following the issue of War Party military service in forums where military age Republicans gather.

Really easy to follow, also---The sorry fact is the subject of personally going to war never comes up.

Now, the topic of cowardice comes up constantly. Of course, this label is always reserved for other people who are not them.

Including, in more than one instance, actual combat veterans that don't supoort the war.

Zap, shouldn't Bill Clinton be at the top of your list.

LOL

I would do the same if I was so inclined.

Yet you are willing to condemn this man to death?

Why aren't you so inclined Boa?

The sorry fact is the subject of personally going to war never comes up.

I would suspect that's because most people here are in their 30's or 40's and are beyond the age when most people enlist or have already served.

This extended hypocrisy about service and personal risk is probably bringing Bush and what remains of his allies down more than most things.

People where I live, and it's a very conservative place, understand who and who does not pays the piper in Iraq.

"Effete" is a word they understand, as is "selfish". They increasingly apply it to those that got them into the current mess.

But hey---maybe all those intellectual and physically fit twenty-somethings over at Red State will build houses for the poor or something (much) later on in life if they can't make Iraq.

"I would do the same if I was so inclined."

What the fuck does that mean? It means you would do the same if you felt like it? Good thing for you that you don't feel like it.

Hypocrite.

Zap, shouldn't Bill Clinton be at the top of your list.

LOL

Posted by Bowa

I believe 'h' comes before 'i'. But that's just a guess.

Make that 'L'.

"I would suspect that's because most people here are in their 30's or 40's and are beyond the age when most people enlist or have already served."

Ah...a variation on the ol' "all the good slots were taken" dodge. Here ya go, all you keyboard commandos...
Active Army - 42
Army Reserves - 42
Active Air Force - 27
Air Force Reserve - 34
Active Navy - 34
Naval Reserves - 39
Active Marines - 28
Marine Corps Reserve - 29
Active and Reserve Coast Guard - 27

Opps...there it is.

I've posted before about my accountant, a 'retired' Marine Reserve, who's married to our dog's vet.

A year and a half after his 20 years was up he is called back to active duty and shipped to Iraq.

His wife, with two toddlers and a new baby on her hands, has had to sell her practice and move.

They're devestated. They're also former Bush voters who can't stand the sight of him now.

devastated

The sorry fact is the subject of personally going to war never comes up.

I would suspect that's because most people here are in their 30's or 40's and are beyond the age when most people enlist or have already served.

Posted by Bowa

Not! Before the the light of day spread on the vast majority the subject of personally going to war would be met by one of a few select responses.

1. Coward
2. Disloyal
3. you volunteered, tough

The truth has finally emerged that this is a war for oil.


Our military is our blood and realizing they are being mismanaged and squandered has finally puts into prospective the individual sacrifices.

A year and a half after his 20 years was up he is called back to active duty and shipped to Iraq.

All, I believe that after one "retires' from the military they are moved to the inactive reserves for a couple of years (maybe more now) and can be called back at anytime during that period.

Also, if your friend has a particularly unique expertise, he might have been designated a priority for recall.

It still sucks, but I doubt what the military did was illegal or even out of the ordinary.

Opps...there it is.

Yes, but that doesn't mean that all people in that age group are in a life situation where they can pick up and join the military.

Nor does it invalidate their views in support of the troops and the war if they can't.

To say it does is completely disingenuous and unrealistic.

I mean, should we invalidate the opinions of all those who condemned what happened during katrina but didn't then "volunteer" and go to New Orleans to help with the clean up?

Of course not. That would ridiculous.

Reasonable people know there are many other ways to support our troops, the war effort and America without joining the military.

It still sucks, but I doubt what the military did was illegal or even out of the ordinary.

Posted by Bowa


The proper response to this manning problem, a draft would bring down this administration like a house of cards. In a NY second....

The Democrats lack the balls to end this travesty.

And Bush and Co. lack the balls to actually treat it like the war they claim it to be.

Nor does it invalidate their views in support of the troops and the war if they can't.

To say it does is completely disingenuous and unrealistic.
Posted by Bowa



All 29%?

The proper response to this manning problem, a draft would bring down this administration like a house of cards. In a NY second...

The Democrats lack the balls to end this travesty.

And Bush and Co. lack the balls to actually treat it like the war they claim it to be.

Well, Zap I agree 100%.

...
John M. McHugh
JC Watts
Vin Weber
Bob Barr
Mark Souder
Walter Jones
Katherine Harris


Posted by Zap at 2007-07-14 12:26 PM | Reply

Touche!

Don't blame me, Capt' Multihandle...it was your frame.

Like I said...it's just a variation on the "all the good spots were taken" dodge. You see, when it comes to noisy, clucking chickenhawks, I get real unreasonable.

Service is citizenship. Me? U.S. Coast Guard 1965-69. Sign up or shut up. Your little "I (heart) The Troops" bumper sticker doesn't cut it.

Coast Guard 1965-69

Dutch, during the Vietnam war you joined the coast guard?

LOL

Maybe you shouldn't be accusing others of being "chickenhawks" so quickly.

BTW Dutch: I was in the "real" navy and received an honorable discharge.

LOL

Yes, U.S. Coast Guard, and if you knew my MOS, you'd be shutting your pogey bait pie hole right about now. Word to the wise: take another shot at my choice of service and I'll hand you your head.

Yes, U.S. Coast Guard, and if you knew my MOS, you'd be shutting your pogey bait pie hole right about now. Word to the wise: take another shot at my choice of service and I'll hand you your head.

Like I care.

I was in the real navy -- even more hard core -- the gator navy deployed to asia on an LHA for most of my service.

Suffice it to say that I know and you know that if you were spouting that chickenhawk crap to me and a bunch of my shipmates from the real navy and then you told us that you were in the "coast guard" during Vietnam we would have laughed you out of the room -- you are not to be taken seriously regardless of your MOS.

And frankly, if you had any MOS worth a crap you wouldn't be denigrating others for choosing a different life path then yours -- calling a person "chickenhawk" because they support the troops and the war but haven't joined the military is despicable.

Bowa: The REAL NAVY. Did you sail the seven seas? In the navy did you and the boys do as you please? In the navy did you learn to be a manly man? Did you have "honorable discharges"? Did you and your buddies dress up as an Indian Chief, a cop, hardhat worker, and a cowboy? Are you turning moist just remembering those good ole days?

Any shmuck who denigrates the Coast Guard is an asshole. They provide more practical service to the American people on a daily basis than the typical soldier kicking on some army base or ship.

Bowa all good points. And the word is thrown around on this site to the point where it loses meaning. But when I hear "chicken hawk", I have to admit that I think it fits someone like Dick Cheney perfectly. You don't see ANY hypocrisy in a guy who used connections to avoid the draft five times then turning into someone who wants to send others into fights unnecessarily and without even bothering to fully analyze the situation? Cheney hid in a hole like scared rat for days after 9/11 but he's all for sending others into danger based on his false beliefs. Then he doesn't even respect them enough to admit he was wrong about many things. He just plods along insisting he's right. It is disgusting.

Any shmuck who denigrates the Coast Guard is an asshole. They provide more practical service to the American people on a daily basis than the typical soldier kicking on some army base or ship.

Moder8, my guess is you never served -- if you did you would know that I was letting Dutch know that before he starts denigrating others for not serving, he should remember that, in military service terms" the Coast Guard was considered a joke by those of us who served in the "real navy" -- he knows that's true, which is why he got so defensive. Which was my whole point. I wanted to show him how unfair it is to denigrate someone for their life choices and then tell them they have no right to have an opinion about certain issues -- which is what people who accuse others of being "chickenhawks" are doing.

All that aside, from a civilain standpoint (which is what I am now) , I think the US Coast Guard is a fine organization that is an integral part in the War on terror -- they protect our shores, help secure our borders, and are an important first line of defense.

"deployed to asia"

Spoken like a devotee of Alberto Gonzales.

You don't see ANY hypocrisy in a guy who used connections to avoid the draft five times then turning into someone who wants to send others into fights unnecessarily and without even bothering to fully analyze the situation? Cheney hid in a hole like scared rat for days after 9/11 but he's all for sending others into danger based on his false beliefs.

Sully, I am no fan of Cheney's. Also, I really have for the most part ignored what most of these politicians did during Vietnam -- Clinton, Cheney, Bush, etc. Different time, different place. -- there are few things that I did in my teens, and 20's that impact on the decisions I make today. Different time, different place. And I am not going to judge someone's decisions today by the decisions he made 40 years ago -- unless of course he's John Kerry and asks me to judge him by that criteria.

In fact, the only reason I judged Kerry by his service and conduct during Vietnam was because he himself had made it the major issue of his campaign.

Dumb move. Really dumb move.

"How unfair is it to denigrate people for their life's choices...."

Yes, but our good friends at Red State are at pains to tell others, often those serving in the Armed Forces, now giving up family and career FOR THEIR COUNTRY, how unfair life is, and that they should grow a pair.

We're BURYING kids who served in Iraq around here. So, while I'm no better at reading anyone's soul than anyone else, my opinion is---

That if you're twenty-five or so years old, long since graduated college, and have a claim to fame that primarily consists of starting and managing a Right-wing war-mongering blog---

Then your own time in uniform is now urgently required. After that, maybe we can have a real debate concerning the nature of "Unfair".

BTW Dutch: I was in the "real" navy and received an honorable discharge.

1981?

For the record, these hypocrites can have whatever red-meat opinion they want regarding what risks OTHER people should take to make their fantasies reality.

But then, when they grow up, they shouldn't insult us for running for office.

If any eventually so around here, I'm going to be in the sudience asking them where they were and what they were doing when those John Does they graduated with were having their asses shot off.

I take it all back. You're such a manly man and we all swoon at your hardcore 13-button virility. (snicker)

Paint chippin,' tater peelin,' copy/pastin' lightweight. Here's your candy bar, poge. I wasn't denigrating others...it was you in my cross hairs. I'll bet they offered you E-4 if you'd ship over.

I purposely enlisted in that particular branch of the service as it was very clear to me that the Vietnamese had not attacked the United States in any fashion. But the invitation to the party was such that my country required I dedicate six years of my life to helping in any way I could, so I chose a way that satiated my sense of honor and obligation without compromising my beliefs. I was very fortunate to gain the MOS I had, and I gotta tell you slick there wasn't one officer I served under that was ever sorry my name was on the board under his.

Fuck you and the mop you swabbed in on.

Sorry. I'm in a foul mood today. Another one of my old friends died yesterday, another victim of the tobacco industry. At this rate, there won't be anyone I know left. I'll be more humorously snarky and less pissed tomorrow.

You're still a poge, Bowa.

Sorry. I'm in a foul mood today. Another one of my old friends died yesterday, another victim of the tobacco industry. At this rate, there won't be anyone I know left. I'll be more humorously snarky and less pissed tomorrow.

I'm sorry to hear about your friend. My condolences. Thanks for sharing about your service. Similarly, I joined the Navy because of a general distaste for guns. And I wanted to serve my country, if I could, without compromising those beliefs and putting myself in a position where I might have to shoot someone. I served 6 years as well -- but had an opportunity to deploy to "operation deepfreeze" in Antarctica if I signed up for 8. One of my big regrets that I turned it down. Would have been an amazing experience I'm sure.

.......five deployments ????........

.......there should be alarm bells going off about what the Bushco Crime Syndicate has done to the military.......

""In fact, the only reason I judged Kerry by his service and conduct during Vietnam was because he himself had made it the major issue of his campaign."

Jesus Christ, you and the rest of the right used it against him because he didn't fire back at y'all and you got away with a disgusting character attack based on nothing but lies. Paid attackers, hired to ruin his reputation by Richard Fucking Nixon began that attack and sheep, like yourself, went right along with it resulting in the situation we have today which is a fucking disaster. You tools of the right brought this about and should have a special tax slapped on you and every single Bush voter to pay for his mess.

.......there should be alarm bells going off about what the Bushco Crime Syndicate has done to the military.......

Posted by skizziks

* * * *

I did four deployments in 1994-1995. That's the way things are sometimes.

I did four deployments in 1994-1995. That's the way things are sometimes.Posted by rightisright at 2007-07-15 09:17 AM | Reply | Flag:Hiro Nakamura

Here's a few reasons why the "Chickenhawk label" is so dispicable --

1) Civilians are specifically targeted in modern warfare, but the "chickenhawk" argument suggests that even though civilians are potential casualties, their opinions about war are less valid because they have not served in the military.

On the contrary. The war in Iraq is clearly immoral and has nothing to do with national defense. Chickenhawks like Bowa have nothing to lose except their pride. The only loss he risks is a deflated ego at the thought of a mighty military losing to guerrilla fighters.

So you managed to serve 48 months in two heavy combat zones in the span of 12 months?

Space Time Continuum FTW!

Posted by TreesGoneWild

* * * *

Read the article, Trees, and take a chill pill. You're confusing a TDY deployment with a combat tour. Which suggests to me you've never served, but that's OK:

"Botta was deployed to Afghanistan for about seven months in 2002. He then had three deployments to Iraq about a month in 2003, three months in 2004 and 15 days later that year....Army spokeswoman Maj. Cheryl Phillips noted that Army Reserve units deploy for 12 consecutive months, and that Botta had only accumulated about 10 nonconsecutive months of deployment."

"Sully, I am no fan of Cheney's. Also, I really have for the most part ignored what most of these politicians did during Vietnam -- Clinton, Cheney, Bush, etc. Different time, different place. -- there are few things that I did in my teens, and 20's that impact on the decisions I make today."

I don't think anyone is a chicken for not wanting to go to Vietnam. But you'd figure someone who did quite alot of work to avoid going would understand that sending young people to war is a huge decision. He understood it when his butt was on the line, that is for certain. Cheney not only refused to study the situation in Iraq as he was pushing hard to send troops there, he fired anyone who suggested the situation be studied. He also supported a delusional theory that says Iraqis would magically turn into Jr. Americans once Saddam was out of power. This theory could not be questioned and it led to our planning for this war to be pathetically incomplete. The administration he is a big part of shows complete disregard for the lives of our soldiers through their lack of sensible planning. The fact that he understood the seriousness of war when he was being asked to go but not now is completely fair to point out.

That aside, Cheney is a coward in the present. He hid in a hole for days after 9/11. He would only campaign in front of audiences that took "loyalty oaths" for fear of being asked a tough question. He shot an old man in the face then made HIM apologize. He won't admit to any of his glaring mistakes. But he will sure as hell send men to die without thinking twice.

He is an unthinking hawk. He is a coward. And he is a hypocrite. I can think of alot worse things to call him other than "chicken hawk".

Cheney not only refused to study the situation in Iraq as he was pushing hard to send troops there, he fired anyone who suggested the situation be studied. He also supported a delusional theory that says Iraqis would magically turn into Jr. Americans once Saddam was out of power. This theory could not be questioned and it led to our planning for this war to be pathetically incomplete. The administration he is a big part of shows complete disregard for the lives of our soldiers through their lack of sensible planning. The fact that he understood the seriousness of war when he was being asked to go but not now is completely fair to point out.

Those are all valid criticisms Sully. And while I don't completely agree with some of the characterizations of the events leading up to the war, I certainly can accept the validity of the argument.

On the other hand, using names like "coward" and "Chickenhawk" serves no real purpose in moving the dialogue forward and only serves to make those who stoop to using such terms look like hatemongers, ideologues and completely unserious about their argument.

I wonder when people on the extreme right and extreme left are going to realize that vilifying individuals that don't agree with them defeats their purpose and basically turns most people off.

Chickenhawk Cheney is the official new name for the former Darth Vader. He should have it tatooed on his chest.

Chickenhawk Cheney is the official new name for the former Darth Vader. He should have it tatooed on his chest.

Thanks Danni for proving my point that "using names like "coward" and "Chickenhawk" serves no real purpose in moving the dialogue forward and only serves to make those who stoop to using such terms look like hatemongers, ideologues and completely unserious about their argument"

"I wonder when people on the extreme right and extreme left are going to realize that vilifying individuals that don't agree with them defeats their purpose and basically turns most people off."

I don't consider myself part of "the right" or "the left". But I understand your point and we can find examples of knee jerk political attacks without looking very hard.

But you also have to realize that there are horrible people in this world and when they are revealed as such, it is a natural reaction to villify them. I don't loathe Cheney because he is a Republican. I loathe him for the reasons I gave you. His arrogance has contributed to alot of good people being killed and he remains as dangerously arrogant as he was before he was revealed to be a fool. I don't know what his agenda is (I have some good guesses) but it certainly doesn't include the welfare of the American public at large and the American GI in particular. I am not angry with him because I don't look at his actions objectively. I am angry with him because I have.

BOWA blah, blah, blah.
I made my serious arguments about Iraq a long time ago when the chickenhawks were calling folks like me traitors and worse.
Now, you think we care if our arguments are considered "serious" by the people who wouldn't listen back then???
You've got to be kidding.
I think the names like chickenhawk and coward are relatively kind compared to some of the words that come to mind when describing someone responsible for thousands of unnecessary deaths....mass murderer is one.

I made my serious arguments about Iraq a long time ago when the chickenhawks were calling folks like me traitors and worse.

Well, I don't agree with that either Danni. I believe that the large majority of people who are passionate about these issues do so out of a love for this great nation, not hatred of it. One of the most tragic developments created by the blogosphere has been the ease in which people feel comfortable vilifying that disagree with them with vicious personal attacks. It's not civil. It divides rather then unites. It's part of theproblem not the solution. In the long run, I think it damages our ability to communicate with one another -- not enhances it.

It is amazing how in in real life, I can have heated political discussions and words like "traitor", "Chickenhawk", "Unamerican" never enter into the debate.

For some reason, the same thing doesn't hold true in cyberspace. It is unfortunate.

His arrogance has contributed to alot of good people being killed and he remains as dangerously arrogant as he was before he was revealed to be a fool.

Sully, it's interesting that you bring this up. After church this AM I have a very liberal friend (yes liberals go to church) and we talked for almost an hour about politics. I asked him, "why does the Left hate Cheney so much?"

He said, "because when I listen to him he sounds so damn competent and believable and yet I know that he screwed everything up...he was just wrong about everything"

I don't have the same passionate hatred of Cheney that the Left does -- but I know that huge mistakes were made in the lead up to the war and in the prosecution afterward. It is infuriating for those of us who supported the war as well.

I'm mad as hell at the flawed intel, and the lack of planning, and the 'arrogance" you mention that believed we would be welcomed as liberators and there would be no "insurgency" to deal with.

But that's as far as it goes.

I don't buy the argument that Bush and Cheney are "evil" or owned by "corporations". I don't believe in any of the conspiracy theories put forth by the Left to prove that this Administration ranks up there with Hitler.

And I realize that we can't change the past. So even though it is unfortunate that we did not find the WMD's we expected to -- we are stuck in Iraq now -- fighting al-quada, and Iran/Syria by proxy and trying to help establish a free and democratic Iraq -- all in the best strategic interest of America. And I believe that for us to leave prematurely will have far more dire and long-lasting consequences then to continue implementing the new "surge' strategy which has shown amazing results in Anbar and some promise with Iraqis meeting their benchmarks.

The Delusions keep on going going going going into the Future. They live in seas of Delusions. They can't face the facts.

Larry

Blah, Blah, Blah
Posted by Bowa at 2007-07-15 03:14 PM

Larry

I do believe Bowa, he was talking to Lokisfur.

Larry

I do believe Bowa, he was talking to Lokisfur.


Posted by Zap at 2007-07-15 03:30 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Too fucking funny. That is Hilarious Zap.

Larry

Bowa: serious question:

Are you paid by some rightwing organization to spout their ideological position on sites all over the web?

(That is the best explanation I can come up with for your insistent support for even the most obviously discredited of policies.)

And there's some who will never serve their Country even once.

Are you paid by some rightwing organization to spout their ideological position on sites all over the web?

No.

(That is the best explanation I can come up with for your insistent support for even the most obviously discredited of policies.)

Discredited by who? people here? hardly.

Moder, such comments like this I've come to realize are quite typical of an intolerant elitist Left (or extremist religious Right for that matter) that has trouble conceiving there are people who can have a legitimate disagreement with them.

Rather then realize some people just don't agree with them, they seek to vilify them, dismiss their comments or accuse them of being less then sincere in their beliefs.

In my view, It is a pathetic way to operate and see the world -- demeaning, dismissing, and questioning the motives of those that disagree with you.

I have a question: what would happen if nobody showed up a war everyone agrees was a mistake?

Does anyone know why soldiers are there?

There is no relationship to 911 and why did we invade a soveren nation that posed no risk to the US? When we proved it, why did we kill it's leader?

What is gained by staying there? We are not using the oil.

If the President doesn't have an exit plan, we must understand there is only so much people can physically take. 3 deployments back to back is more than should be allowed. At 5 you're talking almost certain PTSD is it's combat.

'He said, "because when I listen to him he sounds so damn competent and believable and yet I know that he screwed everything up...he was just wrong about everything"'

Bowa, that really hits home with me. I'm not as 'liberal' as you think and I was really trying to hear out the Bushies in the run up to Iraq. I was against it because 1) I thought Afghanistan should have been the focal point and 2) I thought their WMD evidence didn't show Saddam as an immediate threat and it was very suspicious to me that they kept trying to link Saddam to 9/11.

But I still thought that maybe they could make it work. From the way Rummy and especially Cheney spoke, it seemed to me like they must have had high level contacts inside Iraq. They were so confident about what was going to happen that I figured they had anti-Saddam generals ready to jump in and take control after we toppled him. Obviously, they wouldn't be able to tell us that. And it was the only way all their "slam dunk, flowers and chocolates" rhetoric made any sense. I really thought this was in the works because the alternative was very ugly and I wanted to believe the best about them.

I feel betrayed as an American and as someone who assumed competence and good intentions on their behalf. It turns out they were just talking out their posteriors. They had no reason to believe things would just work out for us after Saddam left. They just didn't care enough to consider what would happen if their incredibly naive assumptions were false. Arrogance often functions as stupidity and we can't afford to have people like this in charge.