I'm not a conservative, David, but I kinda like the pictures:

1) Bush was a fighter pilot, but and he looks pretty natural and comfortable in a flight suit. Good for him.

2) The carrier's mission WAS accomplished. "Major combat operations" were also over -- no more large-scale force-on-force actions. The USS Abraham Lincoln had been overseas for 10 months, finally coming home.

3) If there had been even one disgruntled sailor from the Lincoln harping about "being exploited for a cheesy photo-op," I'd be irritated about the story. But every report I've heard show they were thrilled and delighted to have their Commander-in-Chief aboard.

J.

1. He looks ridiculous.
2.That was not what he meant by Mission Accomplished... Lets not rewrite history Jay.
3. I am sure they were, they were going home. I wonder how delighted a three tour Iraq veteran would be about now?

1) He looks like any other flyer, except maybe a bit grayer. The gear's authentic and worn properly.

2) That was the message I got at the time. Carrier mission accomplished, major combat operations over. Still haven't heard anything to refute it.

3) Funny how re-enlistment rates are way up. ESPECIALLY from those in Iraq.

J.

1.Well I heard that real pilots dont fasten the codpiece the way he did.
2. I suggest you go back and read the full text of the speech.
3. Last I heard, enlistments were down so much, they were "dumbing down the requirements to enlist"

David, "codpiece?" Those straps are required. That's what G-Suits are all about -- keeping blood from pooling in the legs during high-G maneuvers, preventing blood rush out of the head and causing blackouts. They also keep the parachute firmly on the back, the life vest on the front, and other safety and survival equipment solidly attached.

Of course, neither of us would fit in an S-3 cockpit.

I went and read the speech -- found a transcript at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/01/iraq/main551946.shtml.
It looks fairly accurate -- major combat operations WERE over, the next phase was securing and rebuilding the country. And so on, and so on.

And if you look at what is being said about how the military is being talked about, and how horrendous the situation is in Iraq, it's surprising that anyone is enlisting.

But like I said, look at the re-enlistment rates. Those who are seeing Iraq, up close and personal, are signing on again.

Hmm... applying your logic on the anti-Rumsfeld generals, that undercuts your position here, doesn't it?

J.

I dont remember where I read about the "cod piece" thing Jay, but I am sure it was from a military pilot and I am sure that it said no pilot uses it like that. Don't remember where and I am too lazy to find it.
On the second point, my reference is that Bush implied that the War was over, and it was far from over, and wont be for a LONNNNNNG time based on what we are hearing.
On the third point, Link please...

David, I'm not going to take your word for the "codpiece" thingy, David, 'cuz I know my own memory, and I've often discovered it was full of crap. But I may float you an alternate theory: it might not be absolutely necessary, but pilots being pilots (see http://www.strategypage.com/humor/articles/military_jokes_20063222.asp) for what I mean), might have made that such an ingrained tradition that it's become routine.

As far as the stats about re-enlistment, how about
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-04-09-army-re-enlistments_x.htm

And let's not forget the rise in colleges that are growing more and more hostile to military recruiting -- again. Gee, that wouldn't have the least affect on recruiting, would it? Nah.

J.

Got to give you your props on this one, the recruitment statement (or retention rather) was correct.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Subscribe to this comment thread.

Comments: