Chicken Hawk!

[fintstone]

Seems like I have heard the phrase bandied about on this BBS. The following article is an interesting take on it.

Anti-war rant -- "Chicken Hawk!"
By Larry Elder
Thursday, September 7, 2006

Chicken hawks: "cowards" who support the Iraq war, but never served in the military.

An e-mail going around the Internet purports to list "chicken hawks," including Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Vice President Dick Cheney and others. It includes people like myself, who applied for and received student deferments during the Vietnam War.

Many oppose the Iraq war in good faith, believing the war ill-advised, while questioning its prosecution. But the anti-war critics' sudden respect for military service simply astonishes. Call them born-again GI Joes. When did military experience become so important?

Former President Bill Clinton remains rabidly popular among Democrats. The former president continuously offers his opinions about world affairs, including the war in Iraq. But where were the chicken hawk accusers when Clinton ran for president? Recall that Clinton campaigned -- not once, but twice -- against two opponents who not only served, but served heroically and with distinction.

Clinton first, in 1992, defeated George Herbert Walker Bush. Bush-41 enlisted in the Navy on his 18th birthday, and after completing 10 months of training, he became the youngest naval aviator in the war. On a mission to attack Japanese installations in the Pacific, Bush's plane was shot and the engines caught fire. Bush completed his attack -- releasing his bombs scoring several damaging hits -- then flew several miles out to sea where he bailed out, and rescuers fished him from the water hours later. Bush received the Distinguished Flying Cross, three Air Medals and the Presidential Unit Citation awarded to the USS San Jacinto.

Clinton, running for re-election in 1996, defeated Sen. Bob Dole, R-Kan. Fighting the Nazis in the hills of Italy in April of 1945, Dole's platoon came under attack. His radioman hit, Dole crawled out of his foxhole to assist the downed man. Nazi machine gun fire tore into his upper right back and arm. His right arm was so badly damaged it was unrecognizable. He was not expected to live. The extensive therapy for his rebuilt arm took about three years and nine operations. Dole, twice decorated for heroic achievement, received two Purple Hearts for his injuries and the Bronze Star Medal for his attempt to assist the downed radioman.

As for Clinton's own record, his student deferment ended in 1968 following his final undergraduate year at Georgetown. A prominent Arkansas lawyer and former judge interceded, persuading the county draft board chairman to put Clinton's draft notice in a "back drawer" for a while. But in his first year at Oxford, Clinton received a draft notice. Influential friends helped Clinton get into the ROTC -- even though he already had an induction notice -- and Clinton managed to get accepted to the Arkansas ROTC program 11 days before his scheduled induction. The military expected him to attend Arkansas Law School in the fall and begin ROTC after his basic training.

Clinton, instead, returned to Oxford for the next school year. After the first draft lottery, Clinton's number was so high it was not likely to be chosen. Clinton then changed his ROTC reserve status -- which he had never fulfilled -- back to "ready to serve." In his letter to the Arkansas ROTC, explaining why he reneged on his agreement, he stated that he "loathed" the military.

Clinton, at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, hailed the military record of the party's standard-bearer, Sen. John F. Kerry, D-Mass. In endorsing Kerry, Clinton stirred up the convention with the refrain "Send me" -- contrasting Clinton's own non-service with Kerry's willingness to serve.

And yes, Kerry did serve honorably. But, according to the Harvard Crimson, Kerry first received four student deferments before graduating from Yale. He then applied for a fifth deferment so he could study in Paris, but the military turned him down. Shortly before he was to be drafted into the Army, Kerry joined the Naval Reserves.

Filmmaker Michael Moore, former President Jimmy Carter's seating companion at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, once called President George W. Bush "a deserter." How, one wonders, does the filmmaker feel about the service record of the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Howard Dean?

Dean, during a military physical, carried with him X-rays and a letter from an orthopedist noting a back condition called spondylolisthesis. U.S. military doctors classified Dean 1Y -- a medical deferment. Yet Dean spent the next year pouring concrete and enjoying skiing in Aspen.

Do those who call non-military war supporters "chicken hawks" wish to confine the Iraq debate to only current and former members of the military? This excludes over 90 percent of living Americans. But, for the sake of argument, let's confine the Iraq war debate to those who served in the military, active and reserve, current and retired. Polls show 70-80 percent of military personnel supported Bush's re-election.

We are at war against Islamo-fascism. Reasonable people can debate the validity and prosecution of the war in Iraq. But reasoned debate and cheap shots are two different things.

[jyl]

I read this a couple times, trying to discern what point he is making.

When you strip out all the rhetoric, the factual points are:

1. Clinton, who did not serve in Vietnam, defeated Bush Sr and Dole, who did serve in WW2.

2. Limbaugh, Hannity, Cheney, Dean, and the author all avoided serving in Vietnam, mostly through student deferments.

3. Kerry got student deferments, then served in Vietnam.

So what is so interesting about these facts?

Suggestion for critical reading skills - take a piece like the above, cross out all the adjectives, adverbs, characterizations, opinions, analogies, and parentheticals. Boil it down to the core of nouns, verbs, and factual statements. Then see if what is left is worth reading.

I usually find that most Op-Ed pieces, from the left and the right, fail this test. They tend to be lots of adjectives and opinions draped on very little "core". The writings of the skinny blonde gal - Coulter? - that get posted here occasionally are a great example.

[fintstone]

I suspected it would be too difficult reading for some. Some should stick to comic books.

[HardDrive]

Originally posted by fintstone
Some should stick to comic books.

Got a mirror handy chief?

[fintstone]

Originally posted by HardDrive
Got a mirror handy chief?

Yes, want to borrow it dipstick?

[fintstone]

Originally posted by jyl
...I usually find that most Op-Ed pieces, from the left and the right, fail this test. They tend to be lots of adjectives and opinions draped on very little "core". The writings of the skinny blonde gal - Coulter? - that get posted here occasionally are a great example.

Good idea....I need to post Coulter's most recent article...I know, like this one...you can pretend it is poorly written since you cannot refute it.

[DaveE]

It really is drivel, has nothing to do with the current situation in Iraq. Clinton was never balls out to start a war where it wasn't necessary, as this current flock of chicken-hawks you seem to adore.

[fintstone]

I love it when liberals cannot make an arguments so they just attack the poster or argument. It must be painful to be so emasculated to only be able to call names like spoiled children.

[DaveE]

You can make all the nasty comments about me that you like, they are truely meaninless to me. The point of the article seems to be that we supported Clinton and have Dean as party leaders while they avoided the military yet we decry the current crop who avoided the military. The glaring difference between them is the Iraq War, a war of choice by those who chose to avoid war when their own butts were on the line. Clinton and Dean didn't support the Iraq War ever to my knowledge so they have little to do with thew whole 'chickenhawk' debate. I believe it's called "smoke screen".

[fintstone]

Originally posted by DaveE
You can make all the nasty comments about me that you like, they are truely meaninless to me...

You went first buddy. Folks in glass houses should not throw rocks.

Originally posted by DaveE
...The point of the article seems to be that we supported Clinton and have Dean as party leaders while they avoided the military yet we decry the current crop who avoided the military...

You are correct

Originally posted by DaveE
...The glaring difference between them is the Iraq War, a war of choice by those who chose to avoid war when their own butts were on the line...

You mean like the one in Yugoslavia?

Originally posted by DaveE
...Clinton and Dean didn't support the Iraq War ever to my knowledge so they have little to do with thew whole 'chickenhawk' debate. I believe it's called "smoke screen".

You got it right the first time. Your heroes were quick to go to war (example-Yugoslavia) as President...but were draft dodgers when they were draft bait. Yet you call conservatives Chicken Hawk...pretty silly of you...but name-calling usually is.

[Usmellgass2?]

I think it is pretty clear that the mans statement points out the hypocrisy and bigotry of a label like chicken hawk. This pet little name is nothing more than a school girl way of trying to say to a group of people that their opinion really doesn't count. It is meant to be demeaning and no different than using a racial slur. I find it particularly interesting because I made reference to my military service, on this board, a while back to show that I had a firsthand knowledge of a subject. I was criticized by the same type of person that probably loves to use the name chicken hawk. With statements similar to; I should not wear my veterans status on my sleeve, and oh you had to throw that in my face.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

It's little more than typical neocon chest-beating pap.

First off, service in the military has nothing whatsoever with an individual's ability to perform the duties of President or Commander-in-Chief. Bush II proves that perfectly.

Secondly, if anyone DARED to question the service records of Bush I or Dole, I'm sure the neocons would go into an absolute tizzy. But they did this same exact thing to John Kerry - a decorated war hero. Not to mention they did it more subtly to John McCain (see also "they eat their own") in order to pave the way for a less moderate candidate in the (R) primary in 2000.

The crap about John Kerry enlisting "just prior to being drafted" is utter speculation. No proof of this is offered.

So here, just to fan the flames, since that's what this post is about - I believe that Bush I and Bob Dole's military service is questionable, the accounts of their supposedly heroic deeds are suspect and the award of their medals/commendations ought to be re-investigated. I think I'll put a campaign together called "Allied Powers Non-Veterans for Truth". It'll have about as much credibility as that other organization that sprung up out of nowhere (funded almost entirely by a well-known neocon supporter, BTW) to slander John Kerry.

Shoe's on the other foot. Want to keep war heroes war heroes? Think we ought to take their service and decorations at face value? It's a little late for that.

Maybe the 'cons bank on everyone out there having short attention spans and memories.

Some of us don't. Unfortunately for them.

[Usmellgass2?]

We can keep John Kerry's service record out of scrutiny here and just call him a War Hero. I am sure he and his supporters would like to have it no other way. But I will point out that after he came home, as he traveled with Jane Fonda, routinely and as publicly as possible accused US forces, including members of his own unit, of repeated atrocity's. As witnessed by his own eyes. But when the Navy called a board of inquiry to examine these accusations, he refused to testify. Whether the ex naval vessel commander was lying to start with, or decided to with hold evidence of these crimes, he made his own bed. It is not one that I would call a Hero's. I point this out because I believe that it is an example of how the man operates.

[Groesbeck Hurricane]

As a former Volunteer GI:

I'm sick of politicians who never served deciding what to do with The US Military!!! Chicken Hawks are on both sides of the fence! He!! they wouldn't even encourage their children to serve!! COWARDS!!!!

[Z-man]

Folks - please limit this thread to discussion of the article, and keep the name calling out of the equation.

I've got three major issues here at work - my head already hurts from two hour-long support calls with different support centers about two separate issues - so I'm cranky, moody, and not a happy camper. I think a bannig or two would help salvage what's left of today...

-Z

[jyl]

Originally posted by fintstone
Good idea....I need to post Coulter's most recent article...I know, like this one...you can pretend it is poorly written since you cannot refute it.

I read it, from the other thread.

After I crossed out all the adjectives, analogies, etc I got about 3 sentences of actual content, and it simply said what's been said over and over in the debates on the Plame/Wilson/Rove thing. I didn't find anything new.

[DaveE]

fint, the only remark I've aimed at you that could remotely be considered name-calling is that you seem to adore those that are commonly referred to 'chicken hawks'. I think most on this board would be in agreement with that.

Regarding our involvement in Yugoslavia, funny you should bring it up in comparison. There was an internal blood-bath going on at the time if you might remember, and the first actual deployment of 500 US soldiers occurred in Sept '91 with the UN under Bush I. These were the days when coalitions were possible, we had friends around the world, had NATO and UN co-operation. Bush, Rice, et al railed against this when running for office, saying we were not about nation-building. What are we attempting to do now, my friend?

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Bush I - "Read my lips - no new taxes!"

Bush II - "We do not engage in nation-building"

See the pattern?

[techweenie]

http://www.nhgazette.com/news/chickenhawks/chickenhawk_headquarters/

[Usmellgass2?]

Originally posted by techweenie
http://www.nhgazette.com/news/chickenhawks/chickenhawk_headquarters/

A very mature piece of journalism...you must be proud