Who Are You?

[Michael Tee]

That seems to have been the original charge. That GWB did not put himsef in danger while he was in the Guard.

I think that particular horse is now officially dead.

Perhaps the oh-so-clever and mature name callers can come up with another fallacy that is as easily dismissed.
=============================================================================
 Why bother?  How many guys in his National Guard unit got killed flying fighter jets in the U.S.A. and how many hours did Bush actually log flying them?

Where does this bullshit originate that flying jets in the U.S. is comparable in risk to flying them in combat?  Did Bush draw combat or hazard pay for his exploits in flying from state to state?

A guy who uses connections to join a service that Colin Powell has called a refuge for rich white boys trying to stay out of combat is not a guy ready to lay down his life in the service of his country.  That's an absurdity.

[BT]

Where does this bullshit originate that flying jets in the U.S. is comparable in risk to flying them in combat?

Please show where anyone made that claim. Fact is pilots die in non combat air craft incidents.

The charge was GWB faced no danger during his stint in the guard. The truth is he did.

[sirs]

Where does this bullshit originate that flying jets in the U.S. is comparable in risk to flying them in combat?

Please show where anyone made that claim. Fact is pilots die in non combat air craft incidents.

Precisely...on both points

[Brassmask]

No, actually the point is flying fighter jets is dangerous stuff, made even more so when flying in enemy territory, but flying the jet itself is extremely hazardous & dangerous work

I have no doubt that may be the point of your diversion.

The original point was whether or not there is a distinction between W's "flying of jets" and Papi's "flying in WWII".  I submit there most certainly is.

BT seems convinced that Bush "faced danger" while (allegedly) flying his National Guard jets.  Certainly any human being who gets into any airplane and sits at the controls is facing danger but let's be honest, there are very few things to run into once you get the thing in the air.  The taking off and the landing are the most difficult parts.  Once in the air, you just kind of have to keep it from running into the ground.  Which is what W did oh, so admirably according to the esteemed BT.

Now, if you have proof of W flying combat missions like Papi did, then please share.

The fact is what BT is calling "danger" would be more aptly referred to as "assumed risk".  You drive a car, you assume the risk of being in a wreck.  Now if you drive a car knowing that other drivers will be purposefully throwing bombs at you on occasion, that is "facing danger".

Papi faced danger again and again, even got shot down.  W faced the basic assumed risk of being in and/or piloting a plane.

[sirs]

No, actually the point is flying fighter jets is dangerous stuff, made even more so when flying in enemy territory, but flying the jet itself is extremely hazardous & dangerous work

I have no doubt that may be the point of your diversion.  The original point was whether or not there is a distinction between W's "flying of jets" and Papi's "flying in WWII".  I submit there most certainly is.

which no one is denying.  No, your original point was the issue as to the danger that Bush took in flying fighter jets.  You clearly claimed he was in no danger, when there are non-combat fatalities all the time involving fighter jets and other military aircraft.  Yes, flying over a Kansas wheatfield is less hazardous than flying over AAA batteries, but that doesn't mean flying a fighter jet is something anyone can be plugged in to do, nor does it lessen the danger every time a pilot takes off.  So your asanine claim that Bush was in no danger flying for the national guard is complete horsehockey

BT seems convinced that Bush "faced danger" while (allegedly) flying his National Guard jets.  Certainly any human being who gets into any airplane and sits at the controls is facing danger but let's be honest, there are very few things to run into once you get the thing in the air.  The taking off and the landing are the most difficult parts.  Once in the air, you just kind of have to keep it from running into the ground.  Which is what W did oh, so admirably according to the esteemed BT.

See?......no frellin clue what's involved.  The dogfighting, the vectoring, the attack runs, the high G manuevers.  No, to you, all he was doing was flying some Cessna in tank top and shorts.  Pathetic

[Brassmask]

As I said before, given the proper training anyone could do it.  Never did I say that I could get in one and take off and land and do high G maneuvers this morning around 9am.

What I did mean is that given the proper training, anyone with eyes and two hands could do it. 

This would include but not be limited to folks like:

Rosanne Barr
Barack Obama
Flavor Flav
General David Patraeus
Chelsea Clinton
Kramer
Osama bin Laden
Mary Hart
Me
Ronald Reagan Jr.
Cher
George Michael
Satchel Farrow
etc

[sirs]

As I said before, given the proper training anyone could do it.  Never did I say that I could get in one and take off and land and do high G maneuvers this morning around 9am.  What I did mean is that given the proper training, anyone with eyes and two hands could do it. 

And anyone that goes up in a fighter jet risks their life every time

This would include but not be limited to folks like:

Rosanne Barr
Barack Obama
Flavor Flav
General David Patraeus
Chelsea Clinton
Kramer
Osama bin Laden
Mary Hart
Me
Ronald Reagan Jr.
Cher
George Michael
Satchel Farrow
etc

Yea....right.....they'd all make great fighter pilots.  Stick with the Buick, Brass



 

[Brassmask]

They may risk their lives every time they go up but they don't face the same risk as someone going up into live combat zones.  That is the difference.

Papi did, W didn't.  The END.

[sirs]

Which again, no one was denying.  The original point was the danger taken in flying a fighter jet.  Just as real here in the states as it is in fling over AAA batteries.  Just more so in the latter.

End of story

[Brassmask]

Which again, no one was denying.  The original point was the danger taken in flying a fighter jet.  Just as real here in the states as it is in fling over AAA batteries.  Just more so in the latter.

End of story

Clearly, you can't read or you are simply a liar.

BT's quote:

GWBush flew jets, which means he put his life on the line every time he got into the cockpit, just like Pappy and McCain. Even more so if he was loaded whilst flying.

So, clearly, W didn't put his life on the line "just like Pappy..."

W put his life on the line with the assumed risk of flying (which to be fair, Papi also did) but Papi put his life on the line in real danger.

So perhaps therein lies our consensus.  BT's statement is true but not complete.  All three men flew jets with the assumed risk that comes with piloting a jet (which I stated anyone could be trained to do with proper time and training) but Papi and McCain flew exponentially more dangerous flight missions with true "danger" and not simply the "assumed risk" of simply being a pilot*.



*And I would be willing to bet at least one margarita that that risk is vastly less than the risk of getting into and driving a car percentage-wise.

[BT]

It would be quite impossible for papi or McCain to fly combat missions if they didn't get into the cockput just like GWB did.

My statement was true as well as complete.

All three were in danger as soon as they buckled up.

[Amianthus]

What I did mean is that given the proper training, anyone with eyes and two hands could do it. 

You need feet as well. The rudder controls (and steering while on the ground) are done with foot pedals. And good eyesight is required, especially for distance judgment.

[Amianthus]

*And I would be willing to bet at least one margarita that that risk is vastly less than the risk of getting into and driving a car percentage-wise.

I'll take that bet.

[Amianthus]

*And I would be willing to bet at least one margarita that that risk is vastly less than the risk of getting into and driving a car percentage-wise.

I'll take that bet.

Risk of death while driving an automobile: 1.3 per 100 million miles driven.
Risk of death while flying in a plane: 1.9 per 100 million miles flown.

Source

[Brassmask]

What I did mean is that given the proper training, anyone with eyes and two hands could do it. 

You need feet as well. The rudder controls (and steering while on the ground) are done with foot pedals. And good eyesight is required, especially for distance judgment.

I'll concede then any person with feet, hands and good eyesight could be trained to fly a jet.