In case anyone doesn't remember, today is the anniversary of the D Day invasion, June 6, 1944.. Pure guts on the part of then young Americans who changed the world and defeated Hitler on that "longest day".

But there were other examples of guts that day, which we didn't learn of until many years later.

The historical archives show that General Eisenhower wrote a letter of resignation, which he intended to submit if the invasion did not achieve its objectives.

The archives also include the three letters from King George to Winston Churchill imploring him not to go on one of the leading landing craft with British soldiers when they hit the beach. The king finally convinced Churchill that his continued leadership of England was more important than leading the army in the invasion.

Even FDR demonstrated guts in authorizing an invasion that if it didn't work would have killed thousands of soldiers, only six months before the 1944 presidential elections.

Guts? You'd better believe it. A "greater generation"? I'd argue absolutely!

I believe we still have military that would demonstrate that kind of leadership. But are there any of our current political leaders who anyone might argue would demonstrate that kind of leadership? Would any of them put their jobs at risk based on whether their political decisions worked out for the country? Name one you think might demonstrate such guts. Just one.

The answer is obvious...and shameful.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

In case anyone doesn't remember, today is the anniversary of the D Day invasion, June 6, 1944.. Pure guts on the part of then young Americans who changed the world and defeated Hitler on that "longest day".

But there were other examples of guts that day, which we didn't learn of until many years later.

The historical archives show that General Eisenhower wrote a letter of resignation, which he intended to submit if the invasion did not achieve its objectives.

The archives also include the three letters from King George to Winston Churchill imploring him not to go on one of the leading landing craft with British soldiers when they hit the beach. The king finally convinced Churchill that his continued leadership of England was more important than leading the army in the invasion.

Even FDR demonstrated guts in authorizing an invasion that if it didn't work would have killed thousands of soldiers, only six months before the 1944 presidential elections.

Guts? You'd better believe it. A "greater generation"? I'd argue absolutely!

I believe we still have military that would demonstrate that kind of leadership. But are there any of our current political leaders who anyone might argue would demonstrate that kind of leadership? Would any of them put their jobs at risk based on whether their political decisions worked out for the country? Name one you think might demonstrate such guts. Just one.

The answer is obvious...and shameful.

I am not trying to be facetious but John McCain's pick of Sarah Palin for his VP was a huge gamble on his part given the amount of vetting his campaign team did of Palin. McCain's gamble on Palin does show a great deal of bravery. More courage than common sense though.

I do not see Mitt Romney nor Barack Obama putting their political careers on the line by taking such a gutsy move though. They are both too logical, careful and slow in their calculations to storm the beachheads in a literal or even a figurative sense.

VK,
That is comparing apples and oranges. WWII and the Allied invasion of Normandy was not a unilateral landing by the US. It was a combined invasion by the Allied forces against a joint enemy.

Yes, it was a risky venture by the Allies and a terrible thing to lose so many lives but it worked out for the best and broke the back of Germany and Italy. We cannot compare the storming of the beaches at Normandy to anything in today's world.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

I am not trying to be facetious but John McCain's pick of Sarah Palin for his VP was a huge gamble on his part given the amount of vetting his campaign team did of Palin. McCain's gamble on Palin does show a great deal of bravery. More courage than common sense though.

I do not see Mitt Romney nor Barack Obama putting their political careers on the line by taking such a gutsy move though. They are both too logical, careful and slow in their calculations to storm the beachheads in a literal or even a figurative sense.

I would suggest many words for McCain's pick of Palin but bravery is not one of them.

That seems more about leadership than about the world being very different.

The adventurer politician-- Teddy Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, JFK-- seems to be a breed that has pretty much died out.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

In case anyone doesn't remember, today is the anniversary of the D Day invasion, June 6, 1944.. Pure guts on the part of then young Americans who changed the world and defeated Hitler on that "longest day".

I believe we still have military that would demonstrate that kind of leadership. But are there any of our current political leaders who anyone might argue would demonstrate that kind of leadership? Would any of them put their jobs at risk based on whether their political decisions worked out for the country? Name one you think might demonstrate such guts. Just one.

The answer is obvious...and shameful.

No matter what else you might say of him, George W. Bush was that kind of leader. He had that kind of courage and fortitude without question, and the personnel of the military knew it, and loved him for it.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

No matter what else you might say of him, George W. Bush was that kind of leader. He had that kind of courage and fortitude without question, and the personnel of the military knew it, and loved him for it.

Never really got that from Bush. He was/is a cheerleader; not someone who puts life and limb at risk. George W. Bush (Yale) - Cheerleader of the 1960s - Photos - SI Vault

Cheerleading of the past two decades is a dangerous sport; but that of the 1960s does not look like a whole lot of very difficult dance moves were involved.

George W. Bush did/does love the military though. There are not very many modern leaders who are also men of action.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

No matter what else you might say of him, George W. Bush was that kind of leader. He had that kind of courage and fortitude without question, and the personnel of the military knew it, and loved him for it.

WOW! This is absolute proof that beauty is subjective. It's better than hanging a 3-year old's finger paintings in the Louvre!

What's wrong with Hollywood?

Have not seen nor heard from Johnny M. for a long time. He used to bring his rescued Greyhound to Doggie Doo Run Run once in a while but have not seen him for probably more than 18 months.

His February 2008 post was about movie stars who used to fight in wars because of their patriotism. Some of these stars were in the Normandy invasion around D-Day or just after.

I remember a couple of years ago when we were on a Transatlantic cruise
and a stop was in Cherboug. We had been to the D Day sites a few times
so decided to just take a tour on a bus as it was relaxing. The bus had a
"French Guide" and the total time to the Memorial the French Guide braged
about how great DeGaulle was and his return to France and the dedicated
Frenchmen who died on D Day. She never mentioned the Americans who had thousands who fought and died on the invasion. Finally an American Vet who was on the bus shouted out to her could she pronounce "American" and after a push she finally said "American" and all clapped on the bus. What she did not say was that ONLY 7 Frenchmen died on D Day beaches vs the thousands of Americans who died to free the French. Enough said.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Never really got that from Bush. He was/is a cheerleader; not someone who puts life and limb at risk. George W. Bush (Yale) - Cheerleader of the 1960s - Photos - SI Vault

Cheerleading of the past two decades is a dangerous sport; but that of the 1960s does not look like a whole lot of very difficult dance moves were involved.

George W. Bush did/does love the military though. There are not very many modern leaders who are also men of action.

When did F.D.R., the President who ordered D-Day, put his "life and limb at risk"?

You're changing the parameters of the question, now that I answered it.

I know why, so you really don't have to answer why you did that.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

No matter what else you might say of him, George W. Bush was that kind of leader. He had that kind of courage and fortitude without question, and the personnel of the military knew it, and loved him for it.

How do you say that George W. Bush was a courageous President? I just do not see that. What did he take risks with in his Administration?

FDR did take big risks with going forward with the D-Day campaign. As Villages Kahuna pointed out.


This is an interesting article from Joe Scarborough-- Opinion: The courage to come home - Joe Scarborough - POLITICO.com

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

How do you say that George W. Bush was a courageous President? I just do not see that. What did he take risks with in his Administration?

FDR did take big risks with going forward with the D-Day campaign. As Villages Kahuna pointed out.


This is an interesting article from Joe Scarborough-- Opinion: The courage to come home - Joe Scarborough - POLITICO.com

The OP posited that there are no politicians today of the caliber of those in the past that he admired for making tough decisions without regard to their personal impact.

I submitted that I thought George W. Bush is indeed of that same caliber. I never said he made exactly the same decisions as those leaders did, but that he would have, without question. George W. Bush proved time and again that he put the nation before himself.

There is no contemporary of his you can say this about.

"George W. Bush proved time and again that he put the nation before himself"

Now, just a minute, RichieLion. If George W. had put the nation before himself, why did he get all the strings pulled to get him into the Texas Air National Guard instead of volunteering for Regular Army (or other branch) and then volunteering to go to Vietnam?

Let's not divert this question with saying what others did but stick with George W.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

The OP posited that there are no politicians today of the caliber of those in the past that he admired for making tough decisions without regard to their personal impact.

I submitted that I thought George W. Bush is indeed of that same caliber. I never said he made exactly the same decisions as those leaders did, but that he would have, without question. George W. Bush proved time and again that he put the nation before himself.

There is no contemporary of his you can say this about.

As someone who is a fanatic of sorts on history, I can assure you that history will treat GW Bush very kindly as greatness of men is always measured in hindsight.

On another sort of unrelated note......the famous drones that are always in the headlines were actually developed by the CIA, not the military and OKd by none other than GW Bush.

Most importantly to the thread theme, the one point the stands out in the thread opener is that that generation of which I as a young lad, was the greatest generation as Tom Brokaw has said. Character counted then....it does not now count nearly as much.