Kerry is a pilot?

in article , Morgans at
wrote on 1/26/04 7:20 PM:


"Philip Sondericker" wrote
I agree with you that distinguished military service is not necessarily a
reason to vote for someone. On the other hand, in a time when so much is
often made about who's patriotic and who's not, who's a "real American"
and
who isn't, I certainly think it's appropriate to point out that John Kerry
served his country (voluntarily, I might add) and served it well.

Only to come back and bash it! I would rather have seen him not serve his
country.

"Bash it"? It seems to me that he volunteered for dangerous duty in a war
that he didn't completely agree with. He put his ass on the line for his
country, even though he didn't agree with the cause. I'm not sure you'll see
a better definition of patriotism in your lifetime.

"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
...
in article , Morgans at
wrote on 1/26/04 7:20 PM:


"Philip Sondericker" wrote
I agree with you that distinguished military service is not necessarily
a
reason to vote for someone. On the other hand, in a time when so much
is
often made about who's patriotic and who's not, who's a "real American"
and
who isn't, I certainly think it's appropriate to point out that John
Kerry
served his country (voluntarily, I might add) and served it well.

Only to come back and bash it! I would rather have seen him not serve
his
country.

"Bash it"? It seems to me that he volunteered for dangerous duty in a war
that he didn't completely agree with. He put his ass on the line for his
country, even though he didn't agree with the cause. I'm not sure you'll
see
a better definition of patriotism in your lifetime.

I'd define it as office seeking.

"Bash it"? It seems to me that he volunteered for dangerous duty in a war
that he didn't completely agree with. He put his ass on the line for his
country, even though he didn't agree with the cause. I'm not sure you'll
see
a better definition of patriotism in your lifetime.

Not saying I disagree with you regarding Kerry's patriotism, but the thought
comes to mind that perhaps we might have actually WON that war if we didn't
have so many "Indians" (like Kerry) thinking they were "Chiefs"...

You really have to wonder how motivated a soldier can be fighting in a war
he actively disagrees with? The next logical question is then: "Can a
soldier act correctly and with all due efficiency fighting a war he does not
support?" Did we lose because of the military rotting from within? Was
Kerry an example of this?

"Sixkiller" may be right : We might have been better off if he had simply
become a conscientious objector.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:QEQRb.44543$U%5.237134@attbi_s03...

Not saying I disagree with you regarding Kerry's patriotism, but the
thought
comes to mind that perhaps we might have actually WON that war if we
didn't
have so many "Indians" (like Kerry) thinking they were "Chiefs"...


I think the fact that the Chiefs kept acting like Indians caused as many
problems as the reverse. The Johnson and McNamara were doing Frag orders
that should have been done by a Col. at best.

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:35:12 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

"Bash it"? It seems to me that he volunteered for dangerous duty in a war
that he didn't completely agree with. He put his ass on the line for his
country, even though he didn't agree with the cause. I'm not sure you'll
see
a better definition of patriotism in your lifetime.

Not saying I disagree with you regarding Kerry's patriotism, but the thought
comes to mind that perhaps we might have actually WON that war if we didn't
have so many "Indians" (like Kerry) thinking they were "Chiefs"...

You really have to wonder how motivated a soldier can be fighting in a war
he actively disagrees with? The next logical question is then: "Can a
soldier act correctly and with all due efficiency fighting a war he does not
support?" Did we lose because of the military rotting from within? Was
Kerry an example of this?

"Sixkiller" may be right : We might have been better off if he had simply
become a conscientious objector.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

C'mon Jay, have you done your homework? The US had enough military
force invested in the Vietnamese war to win it, why didn't they? Why
didn't the North Vietnamese simply give up in the face of that
incredible, overwhelming fire power?

C'mon, you know the answer.

We did not capture the nation. The military was denied permission to
invade North Vietnam because Washington was afraid it would upset
China, and we might have another Korean war on our hands. You cannot
win a war through airpower alone, you must capture all the enemy
territory and their leaders and force them to sign a document of
surrender. The military knew this, they asked permission to invade.

And who denied permission to invade? Here's a hint, it wasn't the John
Kerry's who made those kind of decisions.

The war was controled by Washington to the point where Lyndon Johnson
bragged "They can't even hit an outhouse without my permission."

The debacle of the Vietnam War is the reigning example in the history
of warfare of how NOT to fight a war. The military has studied the
defeat in monumental detail. The First Persion Gulf War showed how
well the military learned (actually they knew how to win, they just
weren't allowed to, it required that the White House agree to a
winning battle plan): Blind the enemy, gut their communications,
demoralize their soldiers and then attack swiftly with MASSIVE force.
Roll them up, don't give them a chance to organize, force a
surrender.

So let's not blame Kerry for realizing that the war was bogus right
away and working to get us out of Vietnam when he returned to civilian
life. Even the leaders of those times now admit that getting into
Vietnam was a big and I do mean BIG mistake.

Corky Scott

In article , Corky Scott says...
....
C'mon Jay, have you done your homework? The US had enough military
force invested in the Vietnamese war to win it, why didn't they? Why
didn't the North Vietnamese simply give up in the face of that
incredible, overwhelming fire power?

C'mon, you know the answer.

We did not capture the nation. The military was denied permission to
invade North Vietnam because Washington was afraid it would upset
China, ...

Quite correct and why we can't afford to have a Democrat in the White House
right now. Clinton was adequate to oversee the interim between the cold war and
the terrorist wars but keep in mind that all the of Democratic candidates save
Lieberman (has he dropped out yet?) are anti war and would immediately freeze us
in position like Johnson. The model applied to Germany and Japan will serve the
worlds interest better than that of Vietnam and North Korea.

"Jay Honeck" writes:

Did we lose because of the military rotting from within? Was
Kerry an example of this?

Jay, you've truly reached a new low with this statement.

I could suggest you read, say, "A Rumor of War"...but I won't. You
prefer to remain in a kinda Disneyland world, all fantasy and no
reality.

Did we lose because of the military rotting from within? Was
Kerry an example of this?

Jay, you've truly reached a new low with this statement.

You seem to think I meant this question in a derogatory sort of way, when,
in fact, it was an honest, open-ended question.

Seeing a member of the armed forces actively protesting an on-going war (as
Kerry supposedly did while in uniform) seems to fit the definition of a
military "rotting from within." I was too young to fully appreciate the
Viet Nam debacle -- I was 15 when South Viet Nam fell -- but this action by
a decorated war "hero" would certainly indicate to me that morale had become
a significant problem for the U.S. military.

What else would you call it?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"Bob Fry" wrote in message
...
"Jay Honeck" writes:


I could suggest you read, say, "A Rumor of War"...but I won't. You
prefer to remain in a kinda Disneyland world, all fantasy and no
reality.

"Jay Honeck" writes:

Did we lose because of the military rotting from within? Was
Kerry an example of this?

Jay, you've truly reached a new low with this statement.

You seem to think I meant this question in a derogatory sort of way, when,
in fact, it was an honest, open-ended question.

If that's the case, then I apologize.

I was 18 in 1973 so while I got a draft card and draft number they
were only calling the first 20-30 numbers when it was my turn. I
avoided service and didn't volunteer. I am not the type that does
well under authority ;-).

I knew of guys who went over there and came back messed up...a good
buddy of mine would tell me of how he and his platoon would tramp
around the jungle, buddies by his side stepping on the occasional land
mine and getting a foot blown off...he got a purple heart but nothing
that bad. He died at age 51 of liver cancer--I think probably Agent
Orange. Another guy in the special forces turned into a killing
machine, started liking killing gooks, and they had to deny him a 4th
tour. He's still violent 35 years later. I went to school with lots
of Vietnam vets. I never knew anybody who thought Vietnam was good.

If the military was rotting it was from BS, gung-ho officers who
wanted everything by the book and took stupid risks with their
men to further their careers. It was from candy-ass politicians who
got their own sons out of danger and would neither support an all-out
effort against N. Vietnam to win, nor would admit their limited,
micro-managed war couldn't win until 50,000 good Americans died.

Hurray for Kerry for keeping his eyes and mind open while in-country,
learning, and having the guts to speak what he thought was the truth,
in or out of uniform. The last thing this country needs is more
mindless sheep for our keepers to lead to perdition.

On 29 Jan 2004 18:52:39 -0800 Bob Fry wrote:

"Jay Honeck" writes:

Did we lose because of the military rotting from within? Was
Kerry an example of this?

Jay, you've truly reached a new low with this statement.

You seem to think I meant this question in a derogatory sort of way, when,
in fact, it was an honest, open-ended question.

If that's the case, then I apologize.

I was 18 in 1973 so while I got a draft card and draft number they
were only calling the first 20-30 numbers when it was my turn. I
avoided service and didn't volunteer. I am not the type that does
well under authority ;-).

I knew of guys who went over there and came back messed up...a good
buddy of mine would tell me of how he and his platoon would tramp
around the jungle, buddies by his side stepping on the occasional land
mine and getting a foot blown off...he got a purple heart but nothing
that bad. He died at age 51 of liver cancer--I think probably Agent
Orange. Another guy in the special forces turned into a killing
machine, started liking killing gooks, and they had to deny him a 4th
tour. He's still violent 35 years later. I went to school with lots
of Vietnam vets. I never knew anybody who thought Vietnam was good.

If the military was rotting it was from BS, gung-ho officers who
wanted everything by the book and took stupid risks with their
men to further their careers. It was from candy-ass politicians who
got their own sons out of danger and would neither support an all-out
effort against N. Vietnam to win, nor would admit their limited,
micro-managed war couldn't win until 50,000 good Americans died.

Hurray for Kerry for keeping his eyes and mind open while in-country,
learning, and having the guts to speak what he thought was the truth,
in or out of uniform. The last thing this country needs is more
mindless sheep for our keepers to lead to perdition.


I'm applausing this post! People with guts to speak their mind are what
this country is all about. And those members of government that want to
try to initimidate anyone opposing them are unpatriotic.


R. Hubbell