NavyDave Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 It didnt help him that his letter came out stating how he loathed the military. Or how it seemed the first thing he did in office was push for openly gay people in the military. Or pushing us into a peacekeeping mission in Haiti with us initially having only 15 bullets per man to install that maniac Aristide of Necklacing fame. Or how his staff couldnt get Top Secret clearance because of failed drug test and other character issues until Bubba forced the issue. Or forcing some of our Units to wear the sky blue berets of the UN and follow the orders of the same until one guy sacraficed his career to bring the travesty to light. Or that our war colleges were opened to China and Russia military officials (96-98) so they could in (Norfolk) see our strategic moves that in turn the could use to defend and attack us Or that the only true government cuts were to the military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 PArdon me for chiming in, but I am noticing a fair amount of "rumors", allegations and unfounded or non-evidenced facts being mentioned here.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Good thing I only deal in facts and keep clippings from stars and stripes and vid clips since 93 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 The facts are that he did make exessive budget cuts to the military and did make strong attempts at allowing openly gay people into the military. Navy Dave, I'm not calling into question everything you posted. Fan62, I always respect your posts but call your last into question on this matter. Show me evidence from a reliable source pertaining to points 1,2,3 &4. I will gladly and willingly shut the f*ck up at that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Originally posted by IAMBG Show me evidence from a reliable source pertaining to points 1,2,3 &4. I will gladly and willingly shut the f*ck up at that point. 1 was the gays in the military thing, primarily. That's common knowledge, and notably was how he chose to make his introduction of himself as President to the military - it was his first military related act and he took great pride in that publicly. 2 is something you're not going to find evidence of, unless some navy guy had a hidden camera somewhere. However, you'll note that it's entirely consistent with the looting of Air Force One and the White House that took place upon the departure of his administration. 3 & 4 are things that I noticed on the evening news, for example. You might find photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Originally posted by IAMBG The facts are that he did make exessive budget cuts to the military and did make strong attempts at allowing openly gay people into the military. 3 I have heard of on seperate posts on this site. I am searching for them right now. 4 I have never heard of ever before. I will bow out on this post, but given the DRASTIC change in foreign policy and need for defense in the last few years, I would say that mentioning Clinton's policies and general attitude towards the military is, to quote smokey:high: "bringin up ol sh*t." Had his policies been any different we would have still found ourselves in the position that we are in now. If not during his presidency, thank god...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Originally posted by redman Actually, Jack, the dollars spent on military offer us the highest rate of return in government spending. Perhaps you're confusing the fraud you're seeing with Medi-Care or wellfare, or countless other government programs. We have the best military in the world, and one every year into which tens thousands of men and women volunteer to receive extremely modest play. What other government program can you say that about? I knew I would be sorry if I dared tell the truth here but how can you know the military offers the highest rate of return? If you don't think there is fraud in the defense industry than you're following yourself. Geez how did we have the best military in the world after 8 years of Clinton? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 IAMBG 1) Navy Dave has already spoken to this... 2) My friend was on the CARGRU staff of the CVN this occurred on during the 50 year Normandy celebrations 3) Underground e-mail, by definition, is the bubba network. Take my word or don't take it. Many in the military noticed that as President Clinton either snapped careless salutes or none at all. Bush is always careful to pop a smart one. Is this critical? no. but it speaks volumes about respect and attention-to-detail. 4) was noted in the news at the time and occurred in Norfolk at the pierside memorial service for stricken Cole sailors. i saw the clip....he was being his "on the campaign" jovial self. it was more bad timing/wrong place than anything else...but it had an impact. in the video he is seen walking and sharing a joke........it may have been entirely harmless. point is it was the wrong time and sent the wrong message. the whole tangent was prompted by JackC's incessant "we have a moron for President" whose foreign policy bungling has created the present situation. this....followed up with an ignorant and arrogant assertion that the military are here to follow orders and nothing more. i tried to point out that this mindset was a tad simplistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Originally posted by fansince62 we won't bother reviewing all the screw-ups, big and small, during the Clinton years. All I can relay to you, as a member of the military, is that I never witnessed the blatant contempt and disrespect for a Commander-in-Chief as I did during the Clinton years. i didn't participate, but it was pervasive. since you are so adept at suggesting long-term consequences flowing from Bush's foreign policies, perhaps you should analyze the damage exacted by your hero. JackC....I actually feel safer knowing that you aren't part of the decision process and that my security depends in no way on you. keep up the good work!!!! Maybe those screwup were caused by people taking there political views to their jobs. I would lay blame on those who couldn't put their country ahead of there disrespect. Believe me, I don't respect George W Bush for a lot of reasons but if I ever came in contact with him I would never show him my lack of respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Originally posted by Kilmer17 Sorry Jack, I dont think most people remember it that way. Do you speak for most people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 1) his immediate foul-ups in attempting to force social engineering before receiving council on the best way to proceed. Yeah he took the advice of the military people and pissed off both sides. 2) small things like white house personnel showing up and stealing things during official visits (to carriers, for instance) as well as a general attitude of arrogance (much as you present us with) I don't see how this can be proved as some widespread thing. It really has no value to the discussion in my opinion. 3) I have seen multiple underground e-mails from military folks who take notice of the often absent or lazy salutes Clinton gave to military folks (for instance, his HC detail) vs Bush's constant attention to this small act of symbolism and respect Give me a break. Dubya saluted with the wrong hand for Christ's sake! 4) getting caught, on camera, laughing and jawing at the memorial service for the Cole sailors Someone looking for something to complain about. I've seen the right say that when he showed remorse it was fake. It really was a sad obsession. 5) the politization of security matters (Vieques Island, for example) Maybe just maybe we should have been using Vieques Island to play war. 6) the manipulation of the military....I was privy to an overseas visit in which military...who had just returned from a long deployment....were directed to appear for a Presidential visit/speech. white house types then appeared many hours before to coach we short order cooks on when/what to applause and cheer. So? 7) others have spoken to budgetary matters....and I will give you this.....there was some maneuvering room given the "peace dividend". too bad he guessed wrong. Guessed wrong? You just say we were the strongest military in the world. The Clinton administration told the Bushies that Terrorism was an important issue when they took office but they were too smart to listen and 9 months later we got what we got. you miss the point entirely....not surprisingly.......orders are followed....respect is earned. riddle me this batman.....asking someone to die for his country requires a certain degree of moral authority. ultimately, there has to be an appeal to a core set of values that all honor and believe in. why should anyone take a Commander-in-Chief seriously who is receiving BJs while holding a phone conversation the substance of which had the potential to impact the lives of those serving in the military? that you obviously don't understand this is not materially important. that the democrats miss the larger issue of trust and shared values is a serious matter and one which can have long-term consequences. What about someone who's Daddy got him into the Texas National Guard from which he went AWOL while our boys were dying in Vietnam. We someone joins the military they need to understand that someone who they don't agree with might be the President, but they still need to do their job the same way. This whole democrats don' t understand trust and shared American values crap is what will have long-term conswquences. The GOP's attempt to label any and all dissent on all issues as being unpatriotic will come back to haunt them! Boy did I open a can of worms. This kind of reaction is the exact reason why we never fix the waste, fruad and abuse in the military and defense departments! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Jack, Jack, Jack..... Yea.....you are part of the problem..........but not serious enough to have to expend any energy on........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Originally posted by IAMBG 3 I have heard of on seperate posts on this site. I am searching for them right now. 4 I have never heard of ever before. I will bow out on this post, but given the DRASTIC change in foreign policy and need for defense in the last few years, I would say that mentioning Clinton's policies and general attitude towards the military is, to quote smokey:high: "bringin up ol sh*t." Had his policies been any different we would have still found ourselves in the position that we are in now. If not during his presidency, thank god...... I thought I was done, but uhhhh, :shootinth oh well:] I reiterate the point that, while this is a valid argument, these points are largely moot becuse we would still be in the same situation we are in now due to the fact that most of the (fansince's 1,2,3 etc) points mentioned would not have prevented what led us to change our policies and prompt for a dramatic increase in defense spending. I know the main issue is whether or not our president is a dumbass, I for one have my own beliefs on that matter but find that point moot as well becuase he is in office and probobly will remian so for another term. I don't know where I stand politically (dem/rep). Kind of feel I am independent, yet all the while I would like to see certain things taken care of: 1. That my fellow citizens aren't made targets again. 2. That our "elected" officials are able to carry out any actions, no matter how unpopular in world opinion, that would ensure my point #1 as well as the overall peace and stability of the world in general. Face it, we seem to be the only one's besides England and a questionable few others, that would put our as*es on the line to see that this is done. So in defense of the Pres., I give him my vote of confidence and for the rest of the world, I give 'em my vote of no confidence. Ok bye:notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 Jack, I actually agree with your primary premise. The Commander in Chief is the Commander in Chief and should be respected by every service person. I would offer you the challenge of demonstrating how/when/where any significant number of military personnel ever failed to provide this respect? You are making the mistake we've all made at some point here, which is talking in an authoritative way about a subject you really know very little about. I think thats where Clinton had some problems, showing general disdain for the military. There are lots of truths in this world that can't be 'proven', demonstrated with concrete evidence, etc...The truth (for most military folks) is that President Clinton made it harder to be in the military and with body language, his agenda, his actions belied a certain lack of respect for it. How do 'I' know this? I never headed a Zogby poll of the military, but most of the folks with first hand knowledge will tell you that this was the prevailing feeling during his tenure. And you are dead wrong in your primary assertion that this was all political. I'm not even sure you're correct that the military is 'more conservative' than the general populace. Thats a statement that reeks of something, I'm not quite sure what yet, and may in fact be wrong. I've always believed the military mirrored US society. The left always argues that the military is disproportionately minority, disadvantaged, etc...which seems contradictory to what you're saying. I think what you don't understand (and I don't mean that disrespectfully - you simply have no life experience to give you some insight into what the military is and is not about) is that in the military you are really judged by what you do, not what you say. It is difficult to explain to a Lance Corporal who has just undergone non-judicial punishment and lost his rank, his leadership position, and a big chunk of his pay why the Uniform Code of Military Justice applies to him, but not the Commander in Chief. Again, I'll end by saying I agree with you. We, as military serviceman, don't get to pick and choose our commanders (at any level), but respect in its truest form is earned, and whether you like it or not Clinton never accomplished that respect and I think its because he never held genuine heartfelt respect for the military and the military sensed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Tarhog.... well said sir. Very well done. I will add to this. Dad was career Army, did 2 terms in Vietnam. I myself did 4 years in Air Force as a Medic in the 80's. Been around the military a long time. I was surprised at the number of people in at the time whom I talked too who didn't have a whole lot of respect for President Clinton. However, I wasn't surprised by the fact that the military continued to do it's job and do it well regardless of the respect or lack thereof for the Commander in Chief. Jack: "You simply follow orders and keep your mouth shut." This is one attitude that was shared by President Clinton. One reason why he never accomplished that respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Clinton had bad "body language"? How am I supposed to argue that? That's too absurd for arguement. If the President's body language causes someone in the military to have trouble doing their job than how the hell are they going to do it with bullets flying over their head. How do any of you know what my life experiences are anyway? I'm stepping out of this discussion because I can see that what I suspected is very true. The reason we've never addressed the WF&A in the military and the defense department is because too many folks take it personally. Sad really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Nooo....again.......your weak attempts to trivialize a matter (no doubt composed after some epistle on sensitivity).....misses the point.......most folks in the military I know had a low regard for President Clinton. Many came upon that pov by how he and his staff treated the military (nebulous as that might seem to you - we know what it is and the word gets around). others felt that way because of budgetary matters. still others came about their position as they witnessed security/safety taking a backseat to local poltical issues. There's a difference between executing orders (he said for the umpteenth time) and privately thinking that the C-n-C is not owed respect. Unlike yourself....we're not verbal and obvious as a sledgehammer in our contempt for the C-n-C when it exists. it doesn't seem to be sinking in.....orders are followed....respect is earned. it's an open secret that the former President did not enjoy a good rapport with the military......... your posts indicate a serious lack of understanding of military culture, obligations and values. that's quite ok since it is consistent with other areas you have voiced opinions about. your notions/understanding of leadership are so remote, young Jack, that they defy imagination. Let us all hope that others in your party have a deeper, broader uderstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Fansince62, You are not part of the solution my friend, therefore you must be part of the problem. Please don' t try to tell my those in the military had an open mind about President Clinton when he first entered office because you and I both know's its BS. I can see we will be unable to clean up any waste, fraud and abuse in the defense department for at least 20 more years so I hope to talk to you then. The fact is Dubya's daddy cut more military than did President Clinton but I see that matters not to your arguement. You speak of bad body language yet you ignore that Dubya actually saluted with the wrong hand. There can be know exchange of opinons when there is such absoulutism on your part. The only thing I can take heart in is the fact that I'm right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 right JackC.......absolution will arrive for you....but it might not be in a manner you expect....... since waste, fraud and abuse is apparently important to you, and you believe that you personally can't effect change in the DoD, my suggestion is you look closer to home.........medicare, welfare....you name it.....start a list on democratic pork projects......apply the principle all around....that's all we're asking....otherwise........keep baying at the moon....no one is listening........you can't follow...and you can't lead....doesn't seem as though there are many options for you Jack....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Originally posted by fansince62 right JackC.......absolution will arrive for you....but it might not be in a manner you expect....... since waste, fraud and abuse is apparently important to you, and you believe that you personally can't effect change in the DoD, my suggestion is you look closer to home.........medicare, welfare....you name it.....start a list on democratic pork projects......apply the principle all around....that's all we're asking....otherwise........keep baying at the moon....no one is listening........you can't follow...and you can't lead....doesn't seem as though there are many options for you Jack....... All areas should be open to review not just ours! Have a good weekend anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 I wonder if the military repsects Dubya - he's been AWOL for 20+ years now. But that doesnt seem to ever get mentioned. I think if I had followed my father into the military, from a military standpoint, I would have had a hard time respecting any of the presidents we have had for the past 40 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 Correction, since it was more than 30 days, Dubya should have been classified as a "deserter". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 pretty clever!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 Originally posted by JackC Clinton had bad "body language"? How am I supposed to argue that? That's too absurd for arguement. If the President's body language causes someone in the military to have trouble doing their job than how the hell are they going to do it with bullets flying over their head. How do any of you know what my life experiences are anyway? I'm stepping out of this discussion because I can see that what I suspected is very true. The reason we've never addressed the WF&A in the military and the defense department is because too many folks take it personally. Sad really. The instance I had in mind Jack was when Clinton was at Normandy for the anniversary of our historic assault there, and placed flowers on the beach. He looked over his shoulder to see if the camera's were on and then adopted his lip-biting sad pose. I think that 'body language' said something. And the saluting thing speaks to the same issue. I think I've conveyed it as best I can from a military guy's standpoint. And its not a matter of affecting the military's ability to do their job ...they always do their job. But the conversation was about why Clinton didn't inspire confidence from most in the military, not the other way around. As far as taking it personally, that again is what you don't understand. I can't explain to you meaningfully what its like to be in the military, but its a tough way to make a living and it means subverting your own wants and desires to the common good. When you're being led by someone who is clearly only interested in their own political ambitions, it creates resentment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.