Kerry Gungho for 'Nam? Or Reluctant like Bush...?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Orson, Mar 8, 2004.

Loading...
  1. Orson

    Orson New Member

    London's Daily Telegraph is on the scoop:

    "[Presidential candidate John Kerry] wrote to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s.

    "The revelation appears to undercut Sen Kerry's carefully-cultivated image as a man who willingly served his country in a dangerous war - in supposed contrast to President Bush, who served in the Texas National Guard and thus avoided being sent to Vietnam.

    "The Harvard Crimson newspaper followed a youthful Mr Kerry in Boston as he campaigned for Congress for the first time in 1970. In the course of a lengthy article, 'John Kerry: A Navy Dove Runs for Congress', published on February 18, the paper reported: 'When he approached his draft board for permission to study for a year in Paris, the draft board refused and Kerry decided to enlist in the Navy.'"
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/03/07/wkerr07.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/03/07/ixnewstop.html
     
  2. tcnixon

    tcnixon Active Member

    Kerry went.

    He served honorably.

    End of story.




    Tom Nixon
     
  3. AV8R

    AV8R Active Member

    Re: Re: Kerry Gungho for 'Nam? Or Reluctant like Bush...?



    I really wish it were the end of the story. Kerry has practically based his entire campaign on his service in Vietnam. Since Kerry places so much emphasis on this service, the fact that Kerry tried to get out of this service is an important development and must be considered.
     
  4. AV8R

    AV8R Active Member

    Kerry killed many civilians...

    Apparantly, according to top military brass, Kerry had a habitual problem of killing civilians. Read the article...

    Article on Kerry killing civilians
     
  5. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Re: Kerry Gungho for 'Nam? Or Reluctant like Bush...?

    I'm sure he wishes it was that easy.

    He then went on to allege war crimes by American soliders in front of a Congressional hearing....acts he stated that he witnessed.

    Who are the alleged war criminals, Senator Kerry? Name them, or at least their unit, so the incidents can be investigated and the perpetrators prosecuted.
     
  6. Let he who is without sin...

    cast the first stone.

    Were any of you guys who dislike Kerry so much and admire Bush alive in the 60s when 'Nam was going on?

    I was.

    I remember.

    So does John Kerry.

    So does George W. Bush.

    Honor is apparent in the actions and intentions of those who went or did not go, depending on the person's philosophy. Those who had NO honor are those who sought to get out of the war simply out of fear or a desire to preserve privileges, something that John Kerry did NOT do - but our current President did.

    Honor was also present among those who honestly protested the war and the genocide-laden policies and actions of the US Military in the Viet Nam conflict - our country is better than that, and did not need to act in that fashion.

    Was John Kerry on both sides of the fence? I do not think so. As a patrician, he went and served because that's what our elite do, at least in the 1960s. He also felt duty-bound to point out the things about the war that were un-American and just plain wrong after he did his time there. Bush did none of this - he avoided the war, played politics in the south, got drunk a lot, and partied, and was more than happy being the pro-American, right-wing spoiled rich kid who got an easy ride.

    Where does honor lie gentlemen (and ladies)?
     
  7. leo

    leo Member

    I was in the Navy then and there was and is no honor.
     
  8. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Genocide?

    I am a Vietnam vet and you are a fool!
     
  9. Last edited by a moderator: Mar 8, 2004
  10. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Re: Fool?

    My Lai was not in fact "genocide."

    Most of my time was in An Khe which was a hot spot for Agent Orange. Am I, in your terms, a "gook." Do you own a dictionary? Do you understand the meaning of "genocide?" How many, in your terms, "gooks" have died from Agent Orange?

    Why do you point to a website to the left of Walter Duranty to bolster your argument?
     
  11. Reply to decimon...

    Sir,
    We will respectfully "agree to disagree", which is fast becoming one of my favorite phrases here.

    I do not call you, nor anyone else in living memory, a "gook", nor do I resort to calling others who post opinions, educated or otherwise, on this board "fools".

    With all due respect, you are on VERY shaky ground defending My Lai as "not being genocide". You are also on shaky ground with me and thousands of others of our generation in assuming that all is now forgotten about VietNam, that it somehow was a "good war after all", and that the US was entirely in the right in its actions in SE Asia as perhaps borne out by the success of Ronald Reagan in defeating Soviet Communism.

    It still don't make it right son.

    What we did there was as ugly and as sinful as any war in history where one dominant empire-state uses its overwhelming force to attempt to subject another population who just so happened to be quite feisty - which we apparently did not like.

    That being said, I know from experience that there were good soldiers and good people in Viet Nam, who tried to do the right thing for not only our country, but the innocent people "in country" around them - however the policies and actions of our highest leadership in the conflict were horrendous. They were horrendous in what they did to the entire area's eco-system, and its people, and to our own soldiers in laying down entirely unrealistic rules of engagement that prevented us from taking the fight to the enemy until we were dead tired of the thing and finally started bombing Hanoi in '72.

    So, what was all the "search and destroy" stuff about up to that point? Why did 50,000+ die in vain? Note that I'm not counting the Vietnamese people who suffered and died at our hands, or the hands of our corrupt and evil allies (the Diem regime, and its successors).

    I understand how one can feel pride at having served. I honor and respect you for it.

    I ask that you do the same for John Kerry, and take a good hard look at the slacker Bush by contrast.

    - Carl
     
  12. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Let he who is without sin...

    Yes...I was born the year that we first sent combat troops (1965), and I was 8 years old when the last soldiers left. Since the US Army hasn't employed drummer boys in quite a few years, I wasn't eligible to serve in Vietnam.

    However, I served a total of 11 years in the US Armed Forces (3 years active Army, 6 years Army National Guard, and 2 years inactive Army Reserve). I served in the only war that I was ever eligible for (the First Persian Gulf War), and I remember how furious I was when there were allegations that we committed war crimes during the liberation of Kuwait. Remember the media's "allegations" that we bulldozed Iraqi soldiers?

    I am very proud that my actions during the war conformed to the highest ethical standards, and I can say the same for all my brother soldiers. If someone did commit a war crime or atrocity, they would have been turned-in within a nanosecond if there were any witnesses.

    Senator Kerry has testified, under oath and in front of a Congressional panel, that he witnessed war crimes and/or atrocities commited by US soldiers in Vietnam. If he's telling the truth, then he needs to reveal everything that he knows, so the perpetrators can be brought to justice. If he's not telling the truth, then he has no business holding any sort of elected office.

    BTW....I admit to disliking Kerry. I've met him several times, and there's nothing there except naked ambition. I don't admire Bush...as a matter of fact, I disagree with a lot of his policies. However, I'll take someone like Bush who means what he says and says what he means, over Kerry, who will say or do anything that he thinks might get him elected.
     
  13. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    "I do not call you, nor anyone else in living memory, a "gook"..."

    You are the only one who did. An implied attribution and dishonest.

    "With all due respect, you are on VERY shaky ground defending My Lai as "not being genocide"."

    Very solid ground.


    "You are also on shaky ground with me and thousands of others of our generation..."

    The ol' collective dodge. I addressed only Carl Reginstein.

    "...in assuming that all is now forgotten about VietNam..."

    I made no such assumption.

    "... that it somehow was a "good war after all""

    I said nothing about the rightness of the war.

    "...and that the US was entirely in the right in its actions in SE Asia..."

    I obviously did not say that.

    "...as perhaps borne out by the success of Ronald Reagan in defeating Soviet Communism."

    I said nothing about Reagan or Communism.

    "It still don't make it right son."

    Nice movie line but I am not your son.

    "What we did there was as ugly and as sinful as any war in history..."

    Hyperbole noted.

    "...where one dominant empire-state uses its overwhelming force to attempt to subject another population who just so happened to be quite feisty - which we apparently did not like."

    JFK as Imperator? Interesting.

    "That being said, I know from experience that there were good soldiers and good people in Viet Nam,..."

    How magnanimous of you.

    "...who tried to do the right thing for not only our country, but the innocent people "in country" around them -"

    Yup. That's why JFK created the Green Berets and put them under CIA control. Operation Phoenix.

    "... however the policies and actions of our highest leadership in the conflict were horrendous. They were horrendous in what they did to the entire area's eco-system, and its people, and to our own soldiers in laying down entirely unrealistic rules of engagement that prevented us from taking the fight to the enemy until we were dead tired of the thing and finally started bombing Hanoi in '72."

    Yet they are still referred to as "The Best and the Brightest."

    "So, what was all the "search and destroy" stuff about up to that point? Why did 50,000+ die in vain? Note that I'm not counting the Vietnamese people who suffered and died at our hands, or the hands of our corrupt and evil allies (the Diem regime, and its successors)."

    You'll have to channel them best and brightest dudes to know.

    "I understand how one can feel pride at having served. I honor and respect you for it."

    I said nothing about my feelings regarding my time in the Army.

    "I ask that you do the same for John Kerry, and take a good hard look at the slacker Bush by contrast."

    I said nothing about Kerry or Bush.

    You really should consider addressing your respondent rather than the voices in your head.
     

Share This Page