Anorak News | War Baby

War Baby

by | 5th, March 2004

‘BACK in 1970, the war in Vietnam was raging and a young man by the name of George W Bush was bravely preparing to stop the Viet Cong overrunning Houston by signing up as a pilot in the Texan National Guard.

‘Neither Alabama nor Texas were attacked when I was there’

So courageous was the young Bush that he was even seconded to the Alabama National Guard, where his missions are even today so secret that there is no public record of his ever being there.

And so it is only right and fitting that a war hero like George Dubya should today be the occupant of the White House and leading the United States in its war against terror.

But people are so ungrateful and it is with distress that we read in the Independent how the President has been attacked for using images of the 9/11 attacks on New York in campaign adverts.

In the ads, the first wave of which aired yesterday, Bush tells the American people: “I know exactly where I want to lead this country…I know what we need to do.”

[After all, what quicker way is there of getting to hell in a handcart than by re-electing GWB?]

But some relatives of the 9/11 victims and firefighters’ unions are said to be deeply unhappy that pictures of the rubble of the World Trade Center were used in such a partisan way.

But Republicans hit back, accusing Democratic challenger John Kerry of using images of Vietnam in his own advertising.

“Thousands died in the present war against terror, just as thousands died in that war,” a party official said.

Equating Vietnam with the war against al Qaeda takes remarkable chutzpah, but the Republicans have it in spades.

Indeed, a comparison between Kerry’s war record and that of the President is remarkably favourable to the latter.

Kerry, for instance, abandoned America in its time of need and sat out the war in South East Asia.

There, he was sufficiently incompetent to get wounded three times, at which point he was effectively sacked, allowing the Viet Cong to drive his fellow Yanks out of their country.

Bush, on the other hand, didn’t abandon his homeland. Nor did he receive so much as a scratch during his years of service, as a direct result of which not a single Viet Cong ever set foot on Texan (or Alabaman) soil.

Folks, the choice is yours.’

Posted: 5th, March 2004 | In: Broadsheets Comment | TrackBack | Permalink