The Left MUST accept the army records about Bush

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

If Bush is a deserter,then where are the court martial records?
Who charged him? I know you don't like Bush,but you must be honest
enough to admit that if he had deserted or gone AWOL,he would
have charged.
Since he was not charged,by anyone except the Bush haters,then
the military ddidn'tthink he had gone AWOL or deserted.
He DID get a commision,he DID fly fighters,and according to the
army,he did fulfill his obligation.
I know you don't like him,but you cannot deny the facts.
Besides,you are telling us to accept the official military
reports about what Kerry may or may not have done in Vietnam,but
you are saying you do NOT believe the official military records
about Bush.
Now,either the records are right for both men,or the records are
wrong for both men.
The records for both men say they served honorably and both
received honorable discharges.
Therefore,either Bush did serve honorably,or Kerry did not.
If you accept the official records for one,you MUST accept the
official records for both.
If you refuse to do that,then you are guilty of intellectual
dishonesty and hypocrisy.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,904 • Replies: 66

No top replies

What records. You can't accept what don't (conveniently) exist. Anybody who could prove Bush did his duty stands to collect a sizeable reward.

0 Replies

So you are saying that there are NO RECORDS of Bush EVER having served?
You are saying that the military has no records of him ever having been on active duty,anywhere?

If that is your position,then you are being blind on purpose.
There have been many reports about his service record,many of those reports have been reposted on A2K.

You want us to believe that Bush never served now,is that it?

0 Replies

Did I understand MN to first say you must accept that Bush served because there are no record that says he dident serve his total commitment. But reject the argument that Bushes records should be given to the public to prove that he did.

0 Replies

rabel22 wrote:

...But reject the argument that Bushes records should be given to the public to prove that he did.

Bush releases Vietnam-era Guard records

at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4230576/

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

rabel22 wrote:
...But reject the argument that Bushes records should be given to the public to prove that he did.

Bush releases Vietnam-era Guard records

at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4230576/

Bogus. That story is from february.

0 Replies

As Ronald Reagan would have said, "There you go again." You assume that because I pointed out the gap in Bush's records, I am stupidly saying there is no proof he served at all. Come, you can do better than that.

0 Replies

Harper wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
rabel22 wrote:
...But reject the argument that Bushes records should be given to the public to prove that he did.

Bush releases Vietnam-era Guard records

at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4230576/

Bogus. That story is from february.

How is it bogus? You mean, contrary to the article, he didn't release records to the public about his duty? That is what rabel22 said should happen and implied incorrectly hadn't.

It is absurd for someone asserting Bush was AWOL to ask him to account for every second of his Guard duty. Someone wishing to make such an assertion should offer evidence it is true. I have seen nothing during the past months except innuendo. Why don't you offer some conclusive, or near to conclusive evidence he was AWOL? I can accuse you of robbing banks, and insist that you account for every second of your time to disprove it, but it doesn't make it so.

0 Replies

The only piece of Bush's records missing is what would exonerate him or prove his guilt. Mighty convenient they are no longer there.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

The only piece of Bush's records missing is what would exonerate him or prove his guilt. Mighty convenient they are no longer there.

At: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040723-111412-6124r.htm

Quote:

The Pentagon yesterday released previously missing pay records for President Bush's service in the National Guard, undermining Democratic accusations that he had shirked his duty.

It is kind of unusual to accuse someone of a crime and then ask him to prove he didn't do it, rather than proving he did do it.

0 Replies

I don't have to accept any records of Bush or Kerry. As a typical american voter I make my judgements based on sound bites and presentation. JFK would have never been president if Nixon had shaved just before the telly debate. Nobody cares about the details of political philosophy, if they did no-one would have forgotten Nixon's role in the House Un-American Activites Commission. Can you say McCarthy?

0 Replies

Whether he served "Honorably" or not we will never know. It is however, great to have friends in high places. Remember, it was those friends that were able to get him into the guard in the first place. Personally, there is no dirty deed I would put beyond Bush's reach.

0 Replies

Quote:

It is kind of unusual to accuse someone of a crime and then ask him to prove he didn't do it, rather than proving he did do it.

Hmm... Like saying Saddam had WMD, and basically asking him to prove they did not exist, instead of us proving they did?

Oh, the irony.

0 Replies

justanobserver
He he he. Very good.

0 Replies

There is not a single credible observance of Bush at his post during the gap. Republicans know this as well as anybody. And to say people just forgot is not a clever answer. I can recall everybody I served close to in the Navy in one way or another. Not one person can identify Bush.

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

Personally, there is no dirty deed I would put beyond Bush's reach.

Name calling doesn't prove much.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

There is not a single credible observance of Bush at his post during the gap. Republicans know this as well as anybody. And to say people just forgot is not a clever answer. I can recall everybody I served close to in the Navy in one way or another. Not one person can identify Bush.

You appear to disagree with my suggestion that those accusing someone of a crime ought to present evidence it is true, rather than requiring him to prove innocence.

0 Replies

JustanObserver wrote:

Quote:
It is kind of unusual to accuse someone of a crime and then ask him to prove he didn't do it, rather than proving he did do it.

Hmm... Like saying Saddam had WMD, and basically asking him to prove they did not exist, instead of us proving they did?

Oh, the irony.

False analogy. We asked him to prove that he had disposed of the weapons and programs he had. No one is disputing that he had them. The only question is what he did with them.

I might also add that one single use of one single WMD can kill a huge number of people - up to a million in some cases, which differs it from issues surrounding Bush's Guard duty.

0 Replies

rabel22 wrote:

Did I understand MN to first say you must accept that Bush served because there are no record that says he dident serve his total commitment. But reject the argument that Bushes records should be given to the public to prove that he did.

I am 100% in favor of Bush releasing ALL of his records.
BUT,if he does,then you MUST accept them as correct and accurate,no matter what they say.
The records he has released from the Army do back him up,yet you on the left wont accept them.
BUT,you are saying that we must accept what Kerry says because what few records he has released do seem to back him up.
If we must accept Kerry's records,even though they are incomplete,then you must accept Bush's records,even though they are incomplete.
You cant say one is good and the other bad,not when they come from the same source.
Its an all or nothing proposition.

So,let me ask this...do you accept the Bush records as accurate,or do you not accept the Kerry records as accurate?

Its one or the other,not both.

0 Replies

damn, and here I was thinking i don't believe either Kerry's nor Bush's records are accurate. But maybe it's just because I have been in the military and am aware of their record keeping abilities.

0 Replies

The Left MUST accept the army records about Bush

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know