AviationBanter

AviationBanter (http://www.aviationbanter.com/index.php)
-   Military Aviation (http://www.aviationbanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   Two MOH Winners say Bush Didn't Serve (http://www.aviationbanter.com/showthread.php?t=9357)

Steven P. McNicoll June 11th 04 08:42 PM


"Lisakbernacchia" wrote in message
...

Is it true that Bush hid behind his dads apron strings in Texas while

Kerry was
at war? ANSWER THE QUESTION


The answer is NO.



George Z. Bush June 11th 04 09:00 PM

Ed Rasimus wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 09:59:56 -0400, "George Z. Bush"
wrote:

I committed no atrocities, am guilty of no war crimes, .....


If, in your entire career flying bomb-carrying combat aircraft, you ever
jettisoned your bomb load for whatever reason on other than your assigned
bona-fide target (let's say in a free fire zone), there are some who might
make the argument that you most certainly did commit either an atrocity or a
war crime if your bombs landed on innocent enemy civilians. I personally
don't care to pursue that point, but you ought not be shocked to learn that
some people might, and they're not necessarily unpatriotic because they feel
that way.


"War crimes" need to be defined as violations of international accords
regarding the conduct of armed conflict. We can't ascribe the term to
whatever offends our particular sensibilities or suits our political
needs of the moment.

Jettisoning weapons in emergencies, for personal defense, etc, is NOT
a war crime. There is considerable difference between jettisoning a
weapons load and targeting innocents. One is acknowledged as an
unavoidable risk of a combat zone while the other is most assuredly
proscribed.

A "free-fire zone" is, in its entirety an area of unrestricted weapons
employment with only small exceptions, such as hospitals, refugee
camps, churches (religious buildings), and white flags exempt.
Delivering in a free-fire zone is not a war crime.

Certainly there are some who "might make the argument" that I "most
certainly did commit either an atrocity or a war crime (that's either
an interesting distinction or a redundancy) IF your bombs landed on
innocent enemy (oxymoron???) civilians." But making the argument isn't
following the definition of a war crime. Some might even accuse the
military of genocide or wholesale murder, but they would be employing
a despicable level of hyperbole.

The purpose of military operations is to "kill people and break
things". Doing anything less is a sure route to defeat.


Ed, I expected you to argue all of the points I posed as a matter of
self-defense, and you didn't disappoint me. The point that I was trying to
make, and it does not require a response from you, was that there are people who
don't see things the way you do, and they're not necessarily wrong just because
they differ with you.

I could argue some of the points you make, as for example your referring to
"innocent enemy (oxymoron???) civilians", by asking how you would categorize
the three day or week or month old Vietnamese infant blown apart by one of your
jettisoned weapons in his or her own home, but I'll let others more qualified
than I deal with that.

George Z.



Yeff June 11th 04 09:06 PM

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:00:09 -0400, George Z. Bush wrote:

Ed, I expected you to argue all of the points I posed as a matter of
self-defense, and you didn't disappoint me. The point that I was trying to
make, and it does not require a response from you, was that there are people who
don't see things the way you do, and they're not necessarily wrong just because
they differ with you.


But sometimes they *are* necessarily wrong. People arguing that something
is a war crime when what they're arguing about doesn't meet that definition
means those people are wrong. Period.

--

-Jeff B.
yeff at erols dot com

George Z. Bush June 11th 04 09:13 PM

Ed Rasimus wrote:
On 11 Jun 2004 16:40:05 GMT, (Lisakbernacchia)
wrote:

Is it true that you can't read a usenet thread?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"


How many Purple Hearts do you have? Is ir true you are a warrior who lost his
war?


I have no Purple Hearts. The idea is to kill or wound the enemy
without being killed or wounded yourself. You might do a quick rerun
of George C. Scott's Patton speech, pay attention to the part about
"making the other poor, dumb ******* die for his country."

I take great pride in being acknowledged as a warrior. Thank you for
that. No, I lost no wars. I returned a winner along with hundreds of
other warriors.



You lost no wars? I was under the impression that after we left that sad,
unfortunate country, the only thing we had to show for our efforts was that big,
black wall in Washington and a grievously divided nation that apparently exists
to this day. What was it that we supposedly won? We must have won something
since you claim that you didn't lose any wars. What was it?
Territory? Reparations? An indigenous Vietnamese government to our political
liking? What did we get out of it as "victors"?

George Z.



Jarg June 11th 04 09:20 PM


"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
Ed Rasimus wrote:
On 11 Jun 2004 16:40:05 GMT, (Lisakbernacchia)
wrote:

Is it true that you can't read a usenet thread?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"

How many Purple Hearts do you have? Is ir true you are a warrior who

lost his
war?


I have no Purple Hearts. The idea is to kill or wound the enemy
without being killed or wounded yourself. You might do a quick rerun
of George C. Scott's Patton speech, pay attention to the part about
"making the other poor, dumb ******* die for his country."

I take great pride in being acknowledged as a warrior. Thank you for
that. No, I lost no wars. I returned a winner along with hundreds of
other warriors.



You lost no wars? I was under the impression that after we left that sad,
unfortunate country, the only thing we had to show for our efforts was

that big,
black wall in Washington and a grievously divided nation that apparently

exists
to this day. What was it that we supposedly won? We must have won

something
since you claim that you didn't lose any wars. What was it?
Territory? Reparations? An indigenous Vietnamese government to our

political
liking? What did we get out of it as "victors"?

George Z.



The United States certainly did not achieve our political objectives in
Vietnam. On the other hand, it is a stretch to say the US lost the war
since it won all the military actions, and left several years before North
Vietnam overran the south. Finally, if you have been to Vietnam recently,
as I have, you would be hard pressed to say they won, or it was a Pyrrhic
victory at best.

Jarg



Steve Hix June 11th 04 09:22 PM

In article ,
(Lisakbernacchia) wrote:

Subject: Two MOH Winners say Bush Didn't Serve
From: Ed Rasimus

Date: 6/11/2004 11:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

On 11 Jun 2004 15:13:35 GMT,
(Lisakbernacchia)
wrote:

Is it true that Bush hid behind his dads apron strings in Texas while Kerry

was
at war?


Is it true that you can't read a usenet thread?


Ed Rasimus


Is it true that Bush hid behind his dads apron strings in Texas while Kerry
was at war? ANSWER THE QUESTION


Why should he bother? You're not interested in the answer, much less
anything resembling truth.

George Z. Bush June 11th 04 09:23 PM

Yeff wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:00:09 -0400, George Z. Bush wrote:

Ed, I expected you to argue all of the points I posed as a matter of
self-defense, and you didn't disappoint me. The point that I was trying to
make, and it does not require a response from you, was that there are people
who don't see things the way you do, and they're not necessarily wrong just
because they differ with you.


But sometimes they *are* necessarily wrong. People arguing that something
is a war crime when what they're arguing about doesn't meet that definition
means those people are wrong. Period.


You might be right and you might be wrong, and putting "Period" at the end of
your comment doesn't mean that the matter's been decided. You might wish it'd
be that way, but that's not the way it works.

George Z.



Lisakbernacchia June 11th 04 09:33 PM

Subject: Two MOH Winners say Bush Didn't Serve
From: "George Z. Bush" am
Date: 6/11/2004 4:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

Ed Rasimus wrote:
On 11 Jun 2004 16:40:05 GMT,
(Lisakbernacchia)
wrote:

Is it true that you can't read a usenet thread?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"

How many Purple Hearts do you have? Is ir true you are a warrior who lost

his
war?


I have no Purple Hearts. The idea is to kill or wound the enemy
without being killed or wounded yourself. You might do a quick rerun
of George C. Scott's Patton speech, pay attention to the part about
"making the other poor, dumb ******* die for his country."

I take great pride in being acknowledged as a warrior. Thank you for
that. No, I lost no wars. I returned a winner along with hundreds of
other warriors.



You lost no wars? I was under the impression that after we left that sad,
unfortunate country, the only thing we had to show for our efforts was that
big,
black wall in Washington and a grievously divided nation that apparently
exists
to this day. What was it that we supposedly won? We must have won something
since you claim that you didn't lose any wars. What was it?
Territory? Reparations? An indigenous Vietnamese government to our
political
liking? What did we get out of it as "victors"?

George Z.


They kicked our ass. Rasimus hasn't tthe guts to admit it.


Ed Rasimus June 11th 04 09:42 PM

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:13:08 -0400, "George Z. Bush"
wrote:

You lost no wars? I was under the impression that after we left that sad,
unfortunate country, the only thing we had to show for our efforts was that big,
black wall in Washington and a grievously divided nation that apparently exists
to this day. What was it that we supposedly won? We must have won something
since you claim that you didn't lose any wars. What was it?
Territory? Reparations? An indigenous Vietnamese government to our political
liking? What did we get out of it as "victors"?

George Z.


I didn't lose. My country lost a lot, but it wasn't the war. It was
pride in being an American and a fundamental belief in democracy. It
was a belief that we were morally anchored and the communists (and now
the jihadist fundamentalist muslims) were wrong. It was the firm
conviction that we were not the reason for injustice and poverty in
this world, but rather the source of a better way.

Take a look, if you choose at Vietnam today. If you see a communist
victory there, you aren't looking very closely. They are a flourishing
capitalist society. They are trading globally, entertaining tourists
from around the world, and the new version of the Hanoi Hilton--the
real hotel chain--advertises an "American breakfast" as included with
the room rate.

What did we get out of it? We changed the way we organize, train and
fight our wars. We lost one F-105 for every 65 sorties over N. Vietnam
in '66 and '67. We lost one fixed wing aircraft for every 3500 sorties
during Desert Storm. We lost one fixed wing aircraft...period, in
Iraqi Freedom for 16,500 sorties. We learned some lessons.

Stop feeling guilty, George. We're Americans and have a right to be
proud.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Jarg June 11th 04 10:04 PM

"Lisakbernacchia" wrote in message
...
Subject: Two MOH Winners say Bush Didn't Serve
From: "George Z. Bush" am
Date: 6/11/2004 4:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

Ed Rasimus wrote:
On 11 Jun 2004 16:40:05 GMT,
(Lisakbernacchia)
wrote:

Is it true that you can't read a usenet thread?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"

How many Purple Hearts do you have? Is ir true you are a warrior who

lost
his
war?

I have no Purple Hearts. The idea is to kill or wound the enemy
without being killed or wounded yourself. You might do a quick rerun
of George C. Scott's Patton speech, pay attention to the part about
"making the other poor, dumb ******* die for his country."

I take great pride in being acknowledged as a warrior. Thank you for
that. No, I lost no wars. I returned a winner along with hundreds of
other warriors.



You lost no wars? I was under the impression that after we left that

sad,
unfortunate country, the only thing we had to show for our efforts was

that
big,
black wall in Washington and a grievously divided nation that apparently
exists
to this day. What was it that we supposedly won? We must have won

something
since you claim that you didn't lose any wars. What was it?
Territory? Reparations? An indigenous Vietnamese government to our
political
liking? What did we get out of it as "victors"?

George Z.


They kicked our ass. Rasimus hasn't tthe guts to admit it.


You have a very different notion of ass kicking than I do! Do a comparison
between the US and Vietnam, both during the war and today, and I think it
will be pretty clear who is on top!

Jarg




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:17 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
AviationBanter.com