If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... I believe his gist was that Kerry demonstrates a remarkable propensity for trying to have his cake and eat it too when it comes to things military ....and my cake and eat it too with respect to economics...unfortunately, Bush seems to have the same... I think that Kerry has every right to have protested the war in the way that he did and I hesitate to criticize someone who served for speaking his mind. I am more interested in what he intends to do when he gets elected, and I hear more criticism than planned action. I would love to find a reason to replace Bush, but so far I can't see a good alternative. Leonard Caillouet |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Brian Allardice" wrote in message news:lBeXb.494098$ts4.154466@pd7tw3no... In article , emoveunderscore says... I disagree. I will admit that there were _incidents_ where these acts occurred. However, Kerry tried to make it look like all the US soldiers were behaving like this. Ah... the classic "Just a few bad apples" defence.... Who is defending the bad apples? I don't think anyone in this forum would do so, apart from a few nuts. On the other hand, I would be careful judging the actions of others when you were not there. Leonard Caillouet |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Leonard Caillouet" wrote in message news:XhfXb.5046$Yj.3516@lakeread02... "Brian Allardice" wrote in message news:lBeXb.494098$ts4.154466@pd7tw3no... In article , emoveunderscore says... I disagree. I will admit that there were _incidents_ where these acts occurred. However, Kerry tried to make it look like all the US soldiers were behaving like this. Ah... the classic "Just a few bad apples" defence.... Who is defending the bad apples? I don't think anyone in this forum would do so, apart from a few nuts. On the other hand, I would be careful judging the actions of others when you were not there. Brian has a long history of leaping to the worst possible conclusion in regards to anything USian. Worse, in this case, is the fact that most of these allegations have been proven to be unfounded--Kerry's reliance upon Winter Soldier testimony, which is the sorce of much of these kind of claims, fails to stand up under closer scrutiny. From a Rand Corp study completed in 2000: "These hearings, generated in part out of the response to widening knowledge of the events at My Lai, painted Vietnam as a catchment of continuous atrocities and "dehumanized" behavior. It should be noted that some have raised serious doubts about the creditability of the testimony and some of the "testifiers" at the Winter Soldier meeting. Lewy (1980), among others, has pointed out that there were grave problems with the Winter Soldier testimony, some were apparently not the people they had presented themselves as, and all refused to give military investigators the dates, sites, and names of perpetrators of atrocities that they had reported. The tragic reality, as Lewy pointed out, was that Herbert's book (Herbert, 1973) and testimony were established to be a series of falsehoods and half truths." http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/library/...18_11_ch9.html Stories of atrocities typically turn out to be apocryphyl at best. Investigators tried to pin down the accusations, but in each case the accuser either recants, is proven to have had no real first-hand knowledge of the allegation, or in the worst cases turns out to have been offering his "testimony" in someone else's name. If Brian has any concrete evidence of actual atrocities of the nature described in Winter Soldier, let him present his case--otherwise, he is just blowing his usual anti-American smoke screen. Brooks Leonard Caillouet |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:08:30 -0500, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote: He wants to be considered a Vietnam war hero, yet he condemned the US soldiers, airmen, and sailors who fought there as being war criminals Yup, he's said that some were war criminals. That wasn 't the case? he wants to claim his undying dedication to all things military, yet his voting record in regards to military programs says otherwise; Support for the military means you have to vote for every dumb-ass proposal that comes along, like Star Wars? Shut your eyes, suspend your critical facilities and vote 'yes'? and he wants to pillory Bush for alleged special treatment in getting into and out of the Guard, yet he himself secured early release from both Vietnam duty and an early release from his own active duty committment. Of course, he actually made it to Vietnam. No one's actually sure that the Dauphin made it as far as Alabama, except to have his teeth done... Sounds like a pretty proficient fence sitter to me... As opposed, for example, to those net.folks who are always very vociferous in support of vets... as long as those vets are not Democrats in an election year? Scott |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"Scott MacEachern" wrote in message ... On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:08:30 -0500, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: He wants to be considered a Vietnam war hero, yet he condemned the US soldiers, airmen, and sailors who fought there as being war criminals Yup, he's said that some were war criminals. That wasn 't the case? His indictment went well beyond "some". From his 18 APR 1971 appearance on "Meet the Press": "...I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals." He lumps the use of .50 cal weapons as anti-personnel weapons and the conduct of search and destroy missions as firther examples of "atrocities". He claims that "the men who ordered us" were guilty of war crimes--so anyone outranking Lt(jg) Kerry are, in his words, war criminals. By his definition, anyone who participated in a search and destroy mission (which is a legitimate tactic in and of itself) was a war criminal. I'd think these categories includes quite a bit more than "some", wouldn't you? he wants to claim his undying dedication to all things military, yet his voting record in regards to military programs says otherwise; Support for the military means you have to vote for every dumb-ass proposal that comes along, like Star Wars? Shut your eyes, suspend your critical facilities and vote 'yes'? No, but you ought to be able to show where you voted for aq goodly portion of them. Kerry liked to be on the side of the typical, "It's a waste of money, it won't work as advertised" crowd; expereince has shown us that the vast majority of our weapons systems have indeed though worked quite well, and saved quite a few US (and likely enemy, by virtue of reducing the lengths of the conflicts we have fought to date) lives. "Even after the first World Trade Center bombing, Senator Kerry voted to gut intelligence spending by $1.5 billion for the five years prior to 2001. In 1996, he voted to slash defense spending by $6.5 billion. Both bills were so reckless that neither had any co-sponsors willing to endorse his plans." washingtontimes.com/national/20040130-105141-8706r.htm Running For Senate In 1984, Kerry Called For Cancellation Of At Least 27 Weapons Systems And Reductions In 18 Other Systems. "[Kerry] recommended cancellation of 27 weapons systems including the B1 bomber, the cruise missile, MX missile, Trident submarine, Patriot air defense missile, F15 fighter plane, Sparrow missile, stealth bomber and Pershing II missile. He recommended reductions in 18 other systems including the joint tactical air system, the Bradley fighting vehicle, the M1 Abrams tank and the F16 fighter plane." - Upon Entering Senate, Kerry's First Floor Speech Was In Opposition To Critical Missile Program And He Introduced Comprehensive Nuclear Freeze Bill. Kerry introduced: "A bill to provide for a comprehensive bilateral and verifiable freeze between the United States and the Soviet Union on the testing, production, and deployment of nuclear weapons systems." The bill had no co-sponsors, and never made it to the Senate floor for a vote. - Weapons Kerry Sought To Phase Out Were Vital In Iraq. "[K]erry supported cancellation of a host of weapons systems that have become the basis of US military might - the high-tech munitions and delivery systems on display to the world as they leveled the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein in a matter of weeks." - Kerry Voted Against At Least Eleven Military Pay Increases. - As Senator, Kerry Also Pushed To Cut Intelligence Funding By More Than $2.58 Billion. Source for the above: www.dgci.net/archives/000139.html I guess a guy who has access to the Heinz fortune felt that pay increases for the military were unneeded. and he wants to pillory Bush for alleged special treatment in getting into and out of the Guard, yet he himself secured early release from both Vietnam duty and an early release from his own active duty committment. Of course, he actually made it to Vietnam. No one's actually sure that the Dauphin made it as far as Alabama, except to have his teeth done... Tell me, how do you think a Guardsmen walks into a military clinic and gets a dental exam without being in a duty status? The claim was that he did not show up for duty in Alabama--you now have the dental records, and the account of another officer in the unit who recalls his showing up there for duty (the gentleman even shared lunch with him on occasion). But you are still gonna cling to that, "he wasn't there" BS, huh? Now, back to the subject of THIS thread...Kerry did indeed get an early redeployment, courtesy of all of those wounds he rec eived that resulted in him missing how many duty days? Then he did indeed obtain an early release from active duty--curiously without the normal reserve duty committment for the remainder of his initial duty obligation? Sounds like a pretty proficient fence sitter to me... As opposed, for example, to those net.folks who are always very vociferous in support of vets... as long as those vets are not Democrats in an election year? Huh? Your point would be...? Brooks Scott |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Lo, many moons past, on Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:32:48 -0700, a stranger
called by some "Admin" came forth and told this tale in us.military.army "Douglas Berry" wrote in message .. . Lo, many moons past, on Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:46:07 -0600, a stranger called by some Stop SPAM came forth and told this tale in us.military.army He reported to Congress that U.S. soldiers had "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam." They did. Vietnam was a brutal conflict, and near the end American command and control began breaking down. Soldiers did do all these tuhings, feeling abandoned by their nation and service. It was a horrible time. Just what the hell do you know about it? It was painted as horrible by the News Media that kept getting in the road along with wimpy Politicians that played to the Media. Neither was the reality yet that is what you saw and even today, the media will still report it the same way. By 1973, South Vietnam WAS a better place and self governed. There was very little fightin going on after that until 1975 when the North Invaded. Up until 1975, the North had problems even raising and equipping a small army. The Tet offensive (all parts of it) and the 1972 attacks into Loas and Cambodia by the US, Thailand, South Korea, Australia and a host of others removed their ability to wage any type of war. It was the Politicos and the media that lost it, not the troops. The Troops won it only to have it handed to the North on a Silver Platter. That's an interesting take on the situation. You keep reading your slanted crap but others of us will report what really went on. Daryl, I get my information from reading histories written by the people who fought the war, reading the Pentagon Papers, and reading about the North's view of the war. Kerry is a politico and not a Warrior and anything he had to do with the organization that Jane Fonda was in would have been considered treasonise under WWII, Korea or WWI and back and would have been punishable by up to death. We sure have come a long way when a Traitor gets to run for president. Harry S. where are you when we need you. Kerry commanded a river patrol boat, won a Silver Star, a Bronze Star with V device, and was aounded in combat three times. And unlike you, he can prove it. Oh, and treasonous? Maybe you need to read the Constitution.. specifically, the Bill of Rights. "Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." As a founding member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, John Kerry agitated to end the war in Vietnam. That's an activity allowed by the First Amendment. So now we can add "anti-American" to your resume. -- Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail WE *ARE* UMA Lemmings 404 Local |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Douglas Berry" wrote in message ... Lo, many moons past, on Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:32:48 -0700, a stranger called by some "Admin" came forth and told this tale in us.military.army "Douglas Berry" wrote in message .. . Lo, many moons past, on Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:46:07 -0600, a stranger called by some Stop SPAM came forth and told this tale in us.military.army He reported to Congress that U.S. soldiers had "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam." They did. Vietnam was a brutal conflict, and near the end American command and control began breaking down. Soldiers did do all these tuhings, feeling abandoned by their nation and service. It was a horrible time. Just what the hell do you know about it? It was painted as horrible by the News Media that kept getting in the road along with wimpy Politicians that played to the Media. Neither was the reality yet that is what you saw and even today, the media will still report it the same way. By 1973, South Vietnam WAS a better place and self governed. There was very little fightin going on after that until 1975 when the North Invaded. Up until 1975, the North had problems even raising and equipping a small army. The Tet offensive (all parts of it) and the 1972 attacks into Loas and Cambodia by the US, Thailand, South Korea, Australia and a host of others removed their ability to wage any type of war. It was the Politicos and the media that lost it, not the troops. The Troops won it only to have it handed to the North on a Silver Platter. That's an interesting take on the situation. Those that served know. Those that didn't, read the news and believe. You keep reading your slanted crap but others of us will report what really went on. Daryl, I get my information from reading histories written by the people who fought the war, reading the Pentagon Papers, and reading about the North's view of the war. It's funny. 30 years later, most of what is written by those that were there contradicts itself. There are so many stories out there. Just how many are really there to just sell a book? Kerry is a politico and not a Warrior and anything he had to do with the organization that Jane Fonda was in would have been considered treasonise under WWII, Korea or WWI and back and would have been punishable by up to death. We sure have come a long way when a Traitor gets to run for president. Harry S. where are you when we need you. Kerry commanded a river patrol boat, won a Silver Star, a Bronze Star with V device, and was aounded in combat three times. And unlike you, he can prove it. I don't have to prove it anymore than you should. Double Standard there, ol buddy. Kerry did get the medals. Now whether they were earned or not, that is questionable. While medals weren't given out at the rate they are today, some go them for political reasons back then. Oh, it's thursday, let's give the Congressman's kid a medal so I can make General someday. Oh, and treasonous? Maybe you need to read the Constitution.. specifically, the Bill of Rights. "Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." As a founding member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, John Kerry agitated to end the war in Vietnam. That's an activity allowed by the First Amendment. During WWII and back, he would have been branded a traitor or an agitator at the least. I don't think you realize the unneeded deaths that resulted by actions of the politicaly powerful. They were misguided and the extremists took it to heart. The Media picked up on it and ran with it. This was the first time in the history of the US that the media was allowed to report like this. And take it from me, it was mostly hogwash when General Abrams took over in 1969. I wasn't there for Westmoreland but got there at about the time Abrams took over. The word from some to the old timers was that the whole flavor changed much to the better. For the first time we could actually engage the enemy. At first, our gunships could not return fire and got shotup on a regular basis. We lost Aircrew Members to Flak. Flak vests don't help much when you take it in the crotch when it's the round is larger than a 50mm. Not much left. Abrams allowed us to fire back. We could only suppress but the Attack birds could get in close enough for the kill. Without us suppressing, the Attack Birds took losses on the way in. A really stupid way to fight a war. That changed. So now we can add "anti-American" to your resume. Not all. But many of us Vietnam Vets see Kerry as just that. Whether he was right or wrong, it costed lives needlessly. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ...
"Peter Skelton" wrote in message ... On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:30:49 -0600, Stop SPAM wrote: loki wrote: Were you even alive in those days? Yes I was, and in fact I well remember Kerry's "Winter Soldier" testimony. Here is the deal. It will never be settled. It wasn't settled back then and it won't be settled now. For the next several elections, the candidates will all have been on the wrong side of the argument according to some folks. I'm not interested in whether or not it is "being settled." You're right - the Vietnam conflict never will "be settled". The issue, to me, is not "settling" Vietnam. I can respect someone who is totally anti-war. They have their opinion, I have mine, and we live in a land where the First Amendment gives us both the right to have and publically state that opinion... But I abhore someone who tries to fence sit and take conflicting stands on an issue, any issue, much less one as important as the military. Kerry, IMHO, is trying to be on both sides of the issue. You have a problem with people who do their duty even if they don't like it? I believe his gist was that Kerry demonstrates a remarkable propensity for trying to have his cake and eat it too when it comes to things military related. He wants to be considered a Vietnam war hero, yet he condemned the US soldiers, airmen, and sailors who fought there as being war criminals; he wants to claim his undying dedication to all things military, yet his voting record in regards to military programs says otherwise; he wants to display his medals for his own benefit, after making a big show of tossing them in protest; he wants to condemn Bush for allegedly not serving his entire reserve committment, while he mysteriously never seemed to even *have* one himself; and he wants to pillory Bush for alleged special treatment in getting into and out of the Guard, yet he himself secured early release from both Vietnam duty and an early release from his own active duty committment. Sounds like a pretty proficient fence sitter to me... Let's see now, Bush left the National Guard early to go to graduate school and Kerry left the active duty Navy with three Purple Hearts as per regulations. Name: John Forbes Kerry Birth date: December 11, 1943 Education: Bachelor's degree, Yale University, 1966; law degree, Boston College, 1976 Military Service: Navy, 1966-1970; Naval Reserves, 1972-1978 Does that look like he copped out? I presume body-counting and carpet bombing forested areas to destroy one bicycle are the acts of a civilized people? Has anyone ever done an assessment on the results of our bombing all those 'strategic' targets? Now it's time for you to answer a question I didn't ask or make some gratuitous comment about the 'cheapness' of Kerry's Purple Hearts. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Let's see now, Bush left the National Guard early to go to graduate school Not quite the case. Bush transferred from the ANG to the inactive reserve, and served an additional six months beyond his six-year obligation. Kerry got an early out, as a matter of fact. Most servicemen did in those years. I am probably the only draftee who actually served my full 730 days, plus a day (drafted in a leap year). all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message om... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Peter Skelton" wrote in message ... On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:30:49 -0600, Stop SPAM wrote: loki wrote: Were you even alive in those days? Yes I was, and in fact I well remember Kerry's "Winter Soldier" testimony. Here is the deal. It will never be settled. It wasn't settled back then and it won't be settled now. For the next several elections, the candidates will all have been on the wrong side of the argument according to some folks. I'm not interested in whether or not it is "being settled." You're right - the Vietnam conflict never will "be settled". The issue, to me, is not "settling" Vietnam. I can respect someone who is totally anti-war. They have their opinion, I have mine, and we live in a land where the First Amendment gives us both the right to have and publically state that opinion... But I abhore someone who tries to fence sit and take conflicting stands on an issue, any issue, much less one as important as the military. Kerry, IMHO, is trying to be on both sides of the issue. You have a problem with people who do their duty even if they don't like it? I believe his gist was that Kerry demonstrates a remarkable propensity for trying to have his cake and eat it too when it comes to things military related. He wants to be considered a Vietnam war hero, yet he condemned the US soldiers, airmen, and sailors who fought there as being war criminals; he wants to claim his undying dedication to all things military, yet his voting record in regards to military programs says otherwise; he wants to display his medals for his own benefit, after making a big show of tossing them in protest; he wants to condemn Bush for allegedly not serving his entire reserve committment, while he mysteriously never seemed to even *have* one himself; and he wants to pillory Bush for alleged special treatment in getting into and out of the Guard, yet he himself secured early release from both Vietnam duty and an early release from his own active duty committment. Sounds like a pretty proficient fence sitter to me... Let's see now, Bush left the National Guard early to go to graduate school and Kerry left the active duty Navy with three Purple Hearts as per regulations. Actually, IIRC Kerry left the *Vietnam* early with three PH's (of dubious nature--still scratching my head over a guy who gets three golden wounds with how many days of duty missed?). Kerry left the Navy early to go be a politician. At least that's what he says--are you gonna argue with him? Name: John Forbes Kerry Birth date: December 11, 1943 Education: Bachelor's degree, Yale University, 1966; law degree, Boston College, 1976 Military Service: Navy, 1966-1970; Naval Reserves, 1972-1978 REALLY? USNR, while he was doing the whole Winter Soldier routine? How many drills did *he* attend? Did he keep up with any IRR requirments? Inquiring minds want to know... Does that look like he copped out? Yeah, in fact he does. I presume body-counting and carpet bombing forested areas to destroy one bicycle are the acts of a civilized people? Has anyone ever done an assessment on the results of our bombing all those 'strategic' targets? What is wrong with counting casualties? What, you think they should be ignored? If the guy on the bike is a bad guy, so be it; but now you have to put-up-or-shut-up: give us the evidence that shows where we targeted one guy with a bike by "carpet bombing forested areas" (by which I presume you mean Arclight). Here is your chance Jack! Make the most of it--and BTW, no Winter Soldier "testimony" (giggle-snort) allowed... Now it's time for you to answer a question I didn't ask or make some gratuitous comment about the 'cheapness' of Kerry's Purple Hearts. Not gratuitous--the comment about the PH's is valid; can you name any other troops who got three of those without missing any duty days? Brooks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
John Kerry insults military reserves | T. Nguyen | Military Aviation | 15 | February 23rd 04 01:22 AM |
General Patton on Lieutenant Kerry | S. Sampson | Military Aviation | 156 | February 22nd 04 05:05 AM |
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements | me | Military Aviation | 146 | January 15th 04 10:13 PM |
We will all regret it, if John Kerry is not endorsed ! -he's the REAL FIGHTER ! | Marc Reeve | Military Aviation | 3 | December 28th 03 11:28 PM |
We will all regret it, if John Kerry is not endorsed ! -he'sthe REAL FIGHTER ! | Sara | Military Aviation | 0 | December 13th 03 06:40 AM |