Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1011)	2/8/2004 10:57:18 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 173976

Deserters used to get a bullet in the back of the head..... You do realize that can be interpreted as a threat against President George Bush's life, right?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1011)	2/8/2004 11:08:04 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

I thought deserters used to be hung...Bush was AWOL, however. Desertion Desertion is the act of leaving military service, or a place of duty, without permission and with the intention not to return. It is the intention not to return that differentiates desertion from the less serious offense of absence from duty. Desertion has been the bane of virtually every organized military force throughout history, and few armies, from the most egalitarian to the most authoritarian, seem to be immune: it takes place in war and peace, in garrison and at the front. Given the sheer dimension of the phenomenon, desertions have unquestionably undermined the efficiency of military organizations. In Napoleonic France, deserters numbered hundreds of thousands: as many as half of the draftees from the Haute-Loire district could be expected to absent themselves from the army at the earliest opportunity. Similarly, in the first year and a half of the American Civil War,the Army of the Potomac alone had 85,000 desertions. However, the advent of peace brought no lessening of the number of desertions in the U.S. Army. To the contrary, the harsh conditions of peacetime service on the western frontier encouraged whole regiments to virtually evaporate: in 1867, desertions from George Custer's famous Seventh Cavalry Regiment reached 52 percent, and between 1867 and 1891, almost one-third of the troops discharged themselves. In more contemporary times, the practice continued, although at somewhat diminished rates. In World War II,the U.S. Army reported 40,000 deserters and the British Army over 100,000, the apparent discrepancy being accounted for by the more lenient American interpretation of "desertion" as opposed to mere absence without leave. The omnipresence of desertion suggests that the underlying causes vary. The fear of death or injury in battle is one obvious factor, but more widespread motives are likely to be less dramatic: simple discontent with military life, homesickness, boredom with garrison duty, personal or financial problems. Indeed, studies of British and American deserters in World War II indicate that soldiers who were less well adjusted as civilians were more likely to desert. Opportunity also plays a part. In the French Foreign Legion, desertion rates varied with locale: in Algeria the problem was less acute if only because there was no place to desert to. Weather can also be a consideration; in the post-Civil War American army, the nickname for a deserter was "snowbird," a reference to those soldiers who preferred to serve only through the winter, deserting in the spring when travel was easier and jobs in the mines or on the transcontinental railroad became available. Traditionally, desertion was among the most serious of military crimes, but punishment—as other aspects of military life—was subject to wide variation. In the army of Frederick the Great,a deserter, especially one from the battlefield, could expect death; but over the years, punishment seems to have been lessened. In the pre-Civil War U.S. Army, a deserter was flogged; after 1861 the practice was discontinued in favor of tattooing or branding. In World War II the U.S. Army frequently charged troops as Absent Without Leave (AWOL) who would have been classified as deserters in most other armies. However, the problem of absence from duty, by whatever name, became so acute in the European theater in 1944 and 1945 that one hapless soldier, Private Eddie Skovik, was executed as an example to others.

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1011)	2/8/2004 11:27:39 PM
From: American Spirit	Respond to of 173976

Bush should at least do four years in the Army on KP duty. He could teach leadership skills to future officers. No wait a minute, not a good idea. KP duty then.

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1011)	2/9/2004 3:10:42 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 173976

Ooops!!! Its a wonder anyone as dumbass as you are is not incarcerated just to protect you from your own stupidity......... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1011)	2/9/2004 3:19:40 PM
From: GROUND ZERO™	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 173976

How do you explain his Honorable Discharge? I don't expect a response from you... oh, and by the way, the Secret Service will be visiting you for making threats against the President... GZ

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1011)	2/10/2004 11:28:10 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 173976

In reference to the two below posts on this thread ... Message 19783702 Message 19783815 ... let's be clear on what we're doing here. We're posting information and opinion relevent to GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth. One issue that has arisn has been Bush's fuzzy military records, the records now available show Bush was absent without leave (AWOL). There is nothing in the records nor in the historical setting to indicate that he deserted. As a point on clarity desertion can only happen during a time of war. Vietnam, the ongoing conflict during Bush's national guard service, was never a declared war. Moreover, he never served in the theater of battle. So Ray's implication that Bush was a deserter is not an accurate portrayal. Indeed, Ray's comment that "Deserters used to get a bullet in the back of the head....." is thus out of context. But also out of context is the assertion by a couple of posters here that Ray's comment represents a threat to the president. This is not the case. Ray expressed a historical fact that deserters once were executed. This is a true fact. But it has no relation to the president. Ray's anger over Bush's military service pretensions, in my view, is justified. Yes, his language was a bit harsh, but also harsh is the reality of the matter. Please review: nhgazette.com Having read the above link, it's easy to understand the backdrop for Ray's anger. It's an anger that's shared by many, not just him. Here's some more background on the matter: thenation.com markarkleiman.com Historical excerpts for context on desertion: worldwar2history.info geocities.com lgrossman.com civilwarhome.com