SwiftVets.com Forum Index SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Service to country challenge, GWB wins hands down

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Vets and Active Duty Military
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sgt-Keeper
Seaman Apprentice


Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 96

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:48 pm    Post subject: Service to country challenge, GWB wins hands down Reply with quote

I just wish the MSM and the SBVs would hammer home this issue:
POTUS flew one of the most complicated jet fighters ever delivered to the US Military. The purpose of this plane was to protect the United States from attack by Russian bombers during the Cold War. His unit was protecting the SW USA. I understand his jet was called a "Lawn Dart" because if it flew low and slow, ie: for close air support as needed in Viet Nam, it immediately became a "lawn dart". Therefore, his flying skills were not of any use in a ground war. His highest and best training use was the final line of defense of the USA homeland. That is honorable service to me.
On the other hand, JFK joined the reserves but got sucker punched into active duty. Then sucker punched again when the Swift Boat mission changed to hazardous duty. Again, my understanding is that he complained so much that he was transferred to a safer patrol. He endangered his crews, lied about his service, and then trashed an entire generation of warriorers with lies and insinuations, while collaborating with the enemy, a disgrace to his Navy uniform. Then got out early, and still refuses to sign a 180 because of problems with????? Confused
Who served honorably? What am I missing?
_________________
Fix the problem, not the blame.
USMC E5 Nam vet 65-66
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lthrneck
Lieutenant


Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 214

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 11:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not the author of this just passing it on:


The claim that CBS's forged documents were "fake but accurate" has been subjected to well-deserved derision. But the Democrats and most of the mainstream media are still sticking to the theory that while the Burkett documents were forgeries, President Bush's record in the Texas Air National Guard nevertheless deserves criticism.

For a good summary of the attacks that have been leveled against President Bush, and an explanation of why they are groundless, see this article by Air Force Col. John H. Wambough, Jr. The piece is lengthy and can be regarded as definitive; here are a few excerpts:

I can say from my experience that flying operational fighter jets is highly dangerous. People don't strap fighter jets to their backside if they are overly concerned for their future. While in F-105 training at McConnell AFB in early 1968, we lost five aircraft in six weeks.
I can assure you that Lt. Bush was continuously exposed to similar dangers during all weather scrambles and during training exercises as evidenced by the F-102 pilots killed in his unit.

Cowards (or people who lack courage) don't take on the risks that Lt. Bush did in flying Fighter Interceptor Aircraft. Flying jets in wing formation in the weather and carrying explosive ordnance on board is dangerous work. The pilots in these squadrons (including Lt. Bush) did what their country asked them to do. They performed their assigned mission and did it well. In November 1970, the Commander of the Texas Air National Guard, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, called Mr. Bush, then 24, "a dynamic outstanding young officer" who stood out as "a top-notch fighter interceptor pilot." "Lt. Bush's skills far exceed his contemporaries," Colonel Killian wrote: "He is a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership. Lt. Bush is also a good follower with outstanding disciplinary traits and an impeccable military bearing."

Lt. Bush entered the ANG in May 1968 and took his last (F-102) flight in the Guard four years later in April 1972. His flying tour included pilot training and than operational flying in the F-102 (111th Tactical interceptor Squadron). During Lt. Bush's time in the Guard he accumulated hundreds of hours of flying time; he served his nation honorably; he flew close to 4 years straight and performed Guard duties in 1972 and 1973 satisfactory to his Squadron Commander (Lt. Col Killian) and satisfactory to the ANG; he was given an honorable discharge in October 1973.

Like all Guard members, Lt. Bush was required to accrue a minimum of 50 points (annually) to meet Guard service requirements (a minimum of 300 points in six years). What the liberal media may not have covered in their many articles about Lt. Bush's ANG service is that Lt. Bush accumulated 954 points - exceeding the six-year Air National Guard requirement for service - threefold. Of course, everyone knows this, right? All those investigative reporters must have brought this fact out a dozen times. I just must have missed it.


In a sane world, for the Democrats to try to make an election issue out of President Bush's National Guard service, more than thirty years after the fact, would be regarded as a sick joke.
_________________
"Old Breed, New Breed, There's not a DAMM bit of
difference so long as it's the MARINE Breed"
- Lt. Gen Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

Semper fi
uuurah
Carry On!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
subsailor 2
Seaman Recruit


Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 20
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 11:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems to me that the President has more time in the cockpit than Kerry had on the rivers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Redleg
Lt.Jg.


Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Posts: 113
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 12:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yep, Kerry continues to be a real class act in trying to pretend that 1971 did not happen. His wife has it right...*******. Wink

George Bush also has more time in the Presidency than Rambo John will ever have.
_________________
FIRE MISSION: Kerry campaign in line of sight.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
DrEntropy
Ensign


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 70
Location: West-central Florida

PostPosted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

lthrneck wrote:
Quote:
I can say from my experience that flying operational fighter jets is highly dangerous. People don't strap fighter jets to their backside if they are overly concerned for their future. While in F-105 training at McConnell AFB in early 1968, we lost five aircraft in six weeks.
I can assure you that Lt. Bush was continuously exposed to similar dangers during all weather scrambles and during training exercises as evidenced by the F-102 pilots killed in his unit.


I'll second this view. I did a stint at Langley AFB VA., where there was a 106 equipped FIS. An "improved" 102. They had a "B model" (back seat). T'was a flying sled (compared to the F-4's). Pilots (and back seaters;-) had to wear a "poopie suit" and were expected to "scramble" (from horn to air) in ten minutes! Then drive the aircraft to target. No easy thing! The press should get the first-person experience, THEN make light of the job GW had back then. I'd LOVE to see someone like Katie Couric trying to follow that script. Mask full of vomitus...

Q: "How was your ride, Ms Couric?"
A: "Mummmpfh mumrfft..."

Or C. Matthews deplane after bein' wrung out in a Hornet?!?

CrewChief: "Need a little help gettin' outta that rig there, Ace?"

Or just run 'em thru "Egress Training" for grins.

BWUHAAHAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!Twisted Evil

Wish ~I~ could get a ride in one-a the new Lawn Darts. :-{
_________________
Dr E--

"The flames kindled on the fourth of July, seventeen hundred and seventy six, have spread over too much of the globe to be extinguished by the feeble engines of despotism." -- Thomas Jefferson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Vets and Active Duty Military All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group