Democrats, Republicans, Pundits & Preachers

[TRNDRVR]

This was forwarded to me via email.
I do not know the validity of its information.
Flaming me for its contents will only fall on deaf ears.

Do You Detect a Pattern Here?

Democrats

* Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
* David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
* Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army
journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
* Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
* Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
* John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V,
Purple Hearts.
* Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
* Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star, Vietnam.
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.
* Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
* Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.
* Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign
ribbons.
* Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars,
and
Soldier's Medal.
* Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and
Legion of Merit.
* Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
* Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze
Star
with Combat V.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
* Chuck Robb: Vietnam
* Howell Heflin: Silver Star
* George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
* Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but
received #311.
* Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
* Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
* John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and Air Medal with 18 Clusters.
* Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul
Wallenberg.


Republicans

* **** Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage.
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked
Max Cleland's patriotism.
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon! Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve.
* Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor.
* George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National Guard; got
assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for U.S.
Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, disappeared from duty.
* Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non-combat role making
movies.
* B-1 Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in Korea.
* Phil Gramm: did not serve.
* John McCain: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart
and Distinguished Flying Cross.
* Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.
* John M. McHugh: did not serve.
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Jack Kemp: did not serve. "Knee problem" (although continued to play in
the NFL for 8 years.)
* Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard.
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Spencer Abraham: did not serve.
* John Engler: did not serve.
* Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
* Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base.



Pundits & Preachers


* Sean Hannity: did not serve.
* Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal cyst.')
* Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
* Michael Savage: did not serve.
* George Will: did not serve.
* Chris Matthews: did not serve.
* Paul Gigot: did not serve.
* Bill Bennett: did not serve.
* Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
* John Wayne: did not serve.
* Bill Kristol: did not serve.
* Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
* Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
* Clarence Thomas: did not serve.
* Ralph Reed: did not serve.
* Michael Medved: did not serve.
* Charlie Daniels: did not serve.
* Ted Nugent: did not serve. (He only shoots at things that don't shoot
back.)



Please keep this information circulating! -- Sen. Howard W. Carroll

[red91]

nice to see Senator Carroll only looked for what he wanted to find...Figures.

Way to go Howie.

Nice to see he threw in John McCain as a token piece...That guy has more balls than the all the Dem's combined.

[XJZ]

So what's the point? Democratic rule depleats our military. THAT'S the bottom line.

John Kerry served and sold out against his fellow soldiers and his country, jeopardising lives of POW's and lengthening the war. This traitor should run our country? This traitor should be our commander in chief?

And Jane Fonda can go f--- herself!

[Lupine]

I got as far as Gray Davis, and then said, "Fawk it."

Sorry. If military service is all that's needed to serve politically, then how come David Hackworth is not President?

[XJZ]

That's beautiful, didn't even catch that.

Gray Davis, the recalled.

[Z22_Z33]

So what's the point? Democratic rule depleats our military. THAT'S the bottom line.

John Kerry served and sold out against his fellow soldiers and his country, jeopardising lives of POW's and lengthening the war. This traitor should run our country? This traitor should be our commander in chief?

And Jane Fonda can go f--- herself!


So we shouldnt have a democary here in this great country?

What was Kerrys rank, while in vietnam? I didnt know he was a general or something higher. How did he lengthen tthe war and help jeopardize POWs?

XJZ will you please answer my question. I want a straight answer, please.

[XJZ]

Do try a web search, then you won't have ask me all this shit on a regular basis. Who does your homework for you? Maybe if you searched you'd realize what a back-stabbing scum bag Kerry really is and not vote for him. Try keywords like; Kerry, vietnam, POW, Hanoi, atrocities, etc. But since you're ALWAYS calling me out, here ya go:

Just for starters: When Kerry returned from Vietnam talking of all the atrocities his fellow American soldiers were committing on innocent people, rape, torture, cutting off body parts, etc, etc,, saying how this war is wrong, and we're at fault, do you think N. Vietnam might use that as leverage/propoganda? Damn right!! Do you think they could possible use that against us? Do you think this could put any of the POWs at risk? Whose side was Kerry on?

See any simularities today with his "wrong war, wrong time" rhetoric? Who's side is he on now? Not ours, never was, never will be.

If you did your homework, you'd find this is only the VERY TIP of the iceberg. Better get busy, you only have a few days.

[Fergie]

I just find it interesting that aside from a VERY select few, only the people on Kerry's boat are supporting him. I wouldnt be surprised if something massive is being covered up. We'll see though.

Also, what I tire of is this two party system. We need some good Libertarian Party candidates or some Independents. Nothing is funnier here in town than telling the coffee shop guy(Kerry supporter) that my wife and I voted for President Bush, but then we voted mostly Democrat as far as our local issues go.

And here is my last thing that'll probably get some going. How can anyone of you that are Christian, call yourself that, and vote for Kerry? Our Christian values should be the most important things we support, and you should be putting that first in your lives.

Fergie

[Z22_Z33]

Do try a web search, then you won't have ask me all this shit on a regular basis. Who does your homework for you? Maybe if you searched you'd realize what a back-stabbing scum bag Kerry really is and not vote for him. Try keywords like; Kerry, vietnam, POW, Hanoi, atrocities, etc. But since you're ALWAYS calling me out, here ya go:

Just for starters: When Kerry returned from Vietnam talking of all the atrocities his fellow American soldiers were committing on innocent people, rape, torture, cutting off body parts, etc, etc,, saying how this war is wrong, and we're at fault, do you think N. Vietnam might use that as leverage/propoganda? Damn right!! Do you think they could possible use that against us? Do you think this could put any of the POWs at risk? Whose side was Kerry on?

See any simularities today with his "wrong war, wrong time" rhetoric? Who's side is he on now? Not ours, never was, never will be.

If you did your homework, you'd find this is only the VERY TIP of the iceberg. Better get busy, you only have a few days.

Well there you go once again. Why won't you answer my question I asked you XJZ. Once again you told me why I shouldnt vote for kerry, not why I should vote for bush.
Homework has nothing to do with this. Did I say I need your advice please tell me who to vote for? You may think I did this but I didnt.
Do you even know who you are voting for XJZ? You seem to not be voting for one man, kerry. Yet you have never said once why bush is so great and why he deserves your vote or others votes. Why is this? Simply because you think kerry is a bad man, you must think bush is the best without looking at anything other then kerry?
You are aware the N. Vietnamesse were willing to win the war at any cost? Even worse it was a limited war. On those 2 reasons we had no way to either win the war or make it get over faster.

[XJZ]

Well there you go once again. Why won't you answer my question I asked you XJZ. Once again you told me why I shouldnt vote for kerry, not why I should vote for bush.
Homework has nothing to do with this. Did I say I need your advice please tell me who to vote for? You may think I did this but I didnt.
Do you even know who you are voting for XJZ? You seem to not be voting for one man, kerry. Yet you have never said once why bush is so great and why he deserves your vote or others votes. Why is this? Simply because you think kerry is a bad man, you must think bush is the best without looking at anything other then kerry?
You are aware the N. Vietnamesse were willing to win the war at any cost? Even worse it was a limited war. On those 2 reasons we had no way to either win the war or make it get over faster.

HERE I GO ONCE AGAIN? I'VE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION, PAY ATTENTION JUST THIS ONE TIME!! This dude suffers from Attention Deficit.

Do you just shoot off at the lips without reading any of the responses to the crap you post? Do you have to keep making duplicate posts, on multiple threads? This is getting old! Are just trying to stir things up? Why is every post of yours flaming someone or someone counter flaming you in response to your crap? I'm tending to believe the consenus on this board is that you're a PITA.

Check out YESTERDAY'S post under; Attention: All You Undecided Voters

Your post, #21.

My post #28. In which in said the reasons to vote Bush are;
1) National Defense/Security/Military
2) Taxs benefits
3) Land Usage

Those were my answers, then and now. Do I need to be more specific? Apparently you didn't pay attention or just don't understand. Do I have to go over the different party's stand on every issue for you? So when you asked AGAIN (and AGAIN), I thought maybe you needed to hear why NOT to vote for Kerry, figured that must be what you're trying to ask. That that might help you understand, Obviously all this might be a little too perplexing for you.

Yes, the Vietnam war was very, very difficult, especially when a traitor like Kerry fuels the enemies fire. WTF is your point?

Do I even know who I'm voting for? I've voted from the comfort of my home over a week ago. The absentee ballot is the only way the fly. I'm assuming your not even old enough to vote.

Now pay attention, go take your Ridilyn.

[Z22_Z33]

Well kind sir. I can read just fine. Could you please read what I wrote?
I ever so kindly asked you why I should vote for Bush, and could you please refrain from slamming anyone.
Yet you did not do this.
First time I thought hey no big deal, maybe he didn’t understand.
So I asked again. I stressed my point of not slamming anyone, please. Yet this time there was not one mention of bush.
You have never told me why I should vote for bush.

"My post #28. In which in said the reasons to vote Bush are;
1) National Defense/Security/Military
2) Taxs benefits
3) Land Usage"

Now how is this a reason to vote for bush?
That is all you have said. The rest of your time was spent slamming kerry. So you have given me all the reason to not vote for this man. But yet I did not ask, "why should I not vote for kerry?" I asked why should I vote bush, and could you tell it to me straight, without slamming anyone.

So let me state my question again. I'll try to make it clearer.
Why should I vote for bush? Could you please not slam anyone. I have heard enough about kerry. Please could you just give me a straight and honest answer without the bs?

Now this is off topic here. The Vietnamese people wanted peace, that is all. They were willing to go to any means necessary to accomplish this feat. How are we going to win a war, when the people are willing to sacrifice everything, including their lives? It was a limited war; do you now know what that mean? We never went into North Vietnam; if we would have done this we could have easily won the war. Yes we bombed North Vietnam, but there needed to be people on the ground as well. By the time we started to do something it was to late. The linebacker bombings by Nixon forced the Vietnamese back to the peace table. But by then it was 1972, no one liked the war, and by 73 74 we were pulling out. The Vietnamese have been fighting for hundreds of years, they have a fighting spirit, and they did not want to be ruled by a foreign power. If this was not a limited war and we openly invaded North Vietnam we could have won. Then again this might have brought in the Soviets or Chinese in to this War. Who can you blame this one man in making the war longer, you need to do your homework about the war and the history of Vietnam, and how far the people were willing to go.

[XJZ]

That's not enough for you? Do you have *ANY* idea of where each candidate/party stands on these issues? Apparently not if I have to explain this to you. Do a search on the internet, your wasting my time.

You're too much!

[Z22_Z33]

No it isnt. So I find what they stand for big deal. I'm asking you man to man. Or would you rather say big smart(you) man to little pansy boy(me)? Why we should vote bush. You have not said once why any of us should. You stated some things but not how he stands on them. Maybe you havent taken the time to look at the man you believe should be the leader of this great country. You cant give me a straight and honest answer without bringing in kerry, why is that?
But since you seem incapable of doing this simple question I asked, I'll instead ask another one.
I am most curious to how you think kerry lengthened the war in Vietnam?

[Sarge]

Just for starters: When Kerry returned from Vietnam talking of all the atrocities his fellow American soldiers were committing on innocent people, rape, torture, cutting off body parts, etc, etc,, saying how this war is wrong, and we're at fault, do you think N. Vietnam might use that as leverage/propoganda? Damn right!! Do you think they could possible use that against us? Do you think this could put any of the POWs at risk? Whose side was Kerry on?

Sorry. I don't like Kerry but if you see wrongs things happening and it appears as if those actions are condoned then you should open your mouth. To do otherwise is frigging wrong. I take umbrage with his making it seem as if it was a majority of the soldiers/Marines/sailors committing these acts when research shows us it was a minority.

Sarge

[copperhead]

Fergie wrote: Also, what I tire of is this two party system. We need some good Libertarian Party candidates or some Independents.

I agree with you on more choices for political parties. I'm still waiting for a political paty that isn't trying to take away some of our rights.

In the end, if there isnt a third party present on the balot, I tend o vote for gridlock. Keep pne party in the house, and the other in the oval office. That way they bicker at each other and less garbage legislation gets passed.

As far as the Christian thing, Bush talks a lot, but his actions tell me a different story.

-Copperhead

[Fergie]

Well, I have only done a little bit of reading on the President and his personal religious views, and from what I have read, he is a born again Christian.

He doesnt believe in gay marriage, wants to stop partial birth abortions and is not afraid to show it. Wether he is right or wrong in the eyes of others doesnt matter to him. He knows he'll be judged in the end, and does what he feels, and BELEIVES to be right.

I can't fault him for that. On the other hand, Kerry is a Catholic who isnt allowed to take Communion. Why is that? Could it be that supports abortion and gay marriage? That isnt too right to me.

As always though, if someone can prevent a logical counter to what I believe, I am always ready to listen.

Fergie

[XJZ]

No it isnt. So I find what they stand for big deal. I'm asking you man to man. Or would you rather say big smart(you) man to little pansy boy(me)? Why we should vote bush. You have not said once why any of us should. You stated some things but not how he stands on them. Maybe you havent taken the time to look at the man you believe should be the leader of this great country. You cant give me a straight and honest answer without bringing in kerry, why is that?
But since you seem incapable of doing this simple question I asked, I'll instead ask another one.
I am most curious to how you think kerry lengthened the war in Vietnam?

Why are you so self depreciating? (He's starting to remind me of xjguy).

I'm going to make this short, hope you get it this time. If you knew the party's stand I wouldn't have to explain all this.

Defense/security/military:
Republicans (OK now, that would be Bush, he is our Republican President, are you with me so far?) spend more money on, build a stronger military, make it a higher priority. I even like the talk about the missle defense system. We need to protect ourselves now more than ever, our homeland and abroad. And Bush is a great Commander in Chief. Kerry (Being the opposition and the polar opposite) has voted to nix every piece of military equipment we have, Stealth Bomber, Aphache helicopters, etc., etc. We'd be fighting in Irag and protecting our homeland with sling-shots if Kerry had his way (or most Democrats for that matter).

Taxes:
I believe we should have more control of our money. Republicans (again that would be Bush) tax less because they don't expand the government the way Democrats do. Did your not get your check from Bush? Small business owners get tax benefits, small businesses help our economy grow. Keeping more of our money and spending it on the things we want also helps stimulate the economy. And before you get off on the economy and jobs, you have to understand that the last 6 mo.s of the Clinton Admin, the economy was in a drastic nose dive. Jobs are now on their way up, along with the economy, which isn't an easy achievment considering Bush was handed a recession, then 9/11 and now the war in Iraq.

Land Use Issues:
Do I have to even explain this to someone that frequents on Off Road board? I can't believe this.....here goes. All Greenie organizations support the Democrats, Democrats support the Greenies. Greenies want you and I and our 4 x4's out of the forests. Hope this isn't news to you. Kerry sounds like he'd even be worse than Clinton. We gained some ground when Bush took office. Interesting show I saw on KQED (northern CA) last night, interviewing the pres. of the Sierra Club (among others), said if Kerry was elected, Kerry would do a complete 180 degrees on what Bush gained for us as far as Roadless issues/areas go. Dude, your favorite trial might not be there in the near future. It's already happening, look at Moab, etc. Don't want to have to say I told you so.

In response to your Vietnam question, I just did a cut and paste, like I said you're wasting too much of my time, again do a search, if I can do it, so can you, it works wonders, here ya go:

Attacks on John Kerry's combat record (whether he deserved his medals) are just the opening act for an even deeper controversy over his antiwar activities, which many opponents back then — and even today — consider to have been treasonous.

For baby boomers, this revives the surreal picture of former Vietnam POWs claiming that Mr. Kerry's charges about US atrocities lengthened their incarceration while war historians relate the details of "free-fire zones" and US bombing of Southeast Asia they allege violated the Hague Convention prohibition against attacking civilians. All that's missing is Country Joe and the Fish singing "I-Feel-Like-I'm-Fixin'-to-Die Rag" at Woodstock in 1969.

"Kerry's remarks to Fulbright's committee were devastating to everybody who served in Vietnam," says former POW Paul Galanti, who was forced to listen to "Hanoi Hannah" broadcast North Vietnamese propaganda about antiwar vets back home. "They were as demoralizing to me as solitary [confinement]. I consider Kerry's remarks to be deliberate lies and a prime reason the war dragged on."



I'm done dealing with you now. Bye.

[Lou]

.... Wether he is right or wrong in the eyes of others doesnt matter to him. He knows he'll be judged in the end, and does what he feels, and BELEIVES to be right.....
Despite its initial outward appearance, this is actually a bad quality.

If someone believes what they are doing is correct in the eyes of god, and the review from god only happens when they have completed their life--
It allows them to commit acts, their entire lives, which are immoral in the eyes of god. This is especially bad when you have some one who believes they are on a mission from god. (Blues Brothers excluded)

[Fergie]

Despite its initial outward appearance, this is actually a bad quality.

If someone believes what they are doing is correct in the eyes of god, and the review from god only happens when they have completed their life--
It allows them to commit acts, their entire lives, which are immoral in the eyes of god. This is especially bad when you have some one who believes they are on a mission from god. (Blues Brothers excluded)
And that is my one worry about him. I fight the fact that I have my Christian beliefs, but I do not believe that a Christian President should necessarily exercise his views over those that arent Christians.

One of the worst things in the world to me is when Christians judge non-Christians. We dont have that right, in my eyes. People will come to God on their on accord. If they have questions, we can answer them, but we dont need to judge them.

A fine balance it is between trying to uphold our Constituition, the law of the land, and the law of God. I wonder how many athiests there were that signed it?

Fergie

[TRNDRVR]

the President is a born again Christian.


:sure: :looser:

Isn't that the same as an alcoholic? No wonder Rush is on his side, they have a lot in common.

[Fergie]

:sure: :looser:

Isn't that the same as an alcoholic? No wonder Rush is on his side, they have a lot in common.
Is that the best you can do as far as an arguement?

Try to be a little more articulate. A coherent response with some kind of backup wouldnt hurt. Right now it sounds like you're an angst ridden highschooler, and from what I have read form you before, you are better than that.

FErgie

[TRNDRVR]

Try to be a little more articulate.Nothing worse than a born again hypocrite who's hit rock bottom and uses a figment of the imagination as a crutch. :rolleyes:

[Eagle]

Who can you blame this one man in making the war longer, you need to do your homework about the war and the history of Vietnam, and how far the people were willing to go.
Listen up, little boy, and listen well.

Lt. JG Kerry put HIMSELF in for purple hearts while in Vietnam, for injuries most military men and women wouldn't even bother reporting to the infirmary to have looked at. But that's nothing.

The standard tour in 'Nam was 12 months, but Kerry engineered four "wounds" and that qualified him to bail out and go home after slightly less than 4 months. Again, most officers in a similar situation would have elected to stay in country with their men, by Lt. JG Kerry couldn't wait to get back to the States.

What did he do there? First, he testified under oath before Congress that he had personal knowledge of widespread atrocities committed by American soldiers against Vietnamese civilians. It has now come out that he had no such knowledge -- he lied under oath the the Congress of the United States.

Not enough? After his active duty was ended, but WHILE STILL AN OFFICER IN THE U.S. NAVY, Lt JG Kerry went to Paris and held unauthorized conferences with members of the North Vietnamese government. This is illegal. In fact, I believe this is deemed treason. It is contrary to both civilian law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The best reason in the world to vote for Bush is: Who in their right mind could possible want a devious, morally bankrupt mouth breather like John Kerry as President and Commander in Chief?

And please ... don't condescendingly tell me to "do my homework" on Vietnam. I WAS THERE, and you weren't even born.

[Z22_Z33]

What did he do there? First, he testified under oath before Congress that he had personal knowledge of widespread atrocities committed by American soldiers against Vietnamese civilians. It has now come out that he had no such knowledge -- he lied under oath the the Congress of the United States.

Not enough? After his active duty was ended, but WHILE STILL AN OFFICER IN THE U.S. NAVY, Lt JG Kerry went to Paris and held unauthorized conferences with members of the North Vietnamese government. This is illegal. In fact, I believe this is deemed treason. It is contrary to both civilian law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The best reason in the world to vote for Bush is: Who in their right mind could possible want a devious, morally bankrupt mouth breather like John Kerry as President and Commander in Chief?

And please ... don't condescendingly tell me to "do my homework" on Vietnam. I WAS THERE, and you weren't even born.


Could you tell me what civilian law and Uniform Code of Military Justice, he broke and how he did it? Right now I am just curious. Yes I could do a search on the net but there would be too much bs I'd have to sort through, and I couldn’t tell whose is lying or speaking the truth.
I was not talking to you, about doing homework. I was talking to XJZ. I was just curious how kerry can be held accountable for making the war longer and worse for the pows. Someone said earlier that he is against kerry, but we should speak out for what we think is wrong.
So the fact the people of North Vietnam were willing to go to any lengths to get us out and that we were a foreign nation has nothing to do with how the POWs were treated or how long the war was to last. Instead this one man is the reason?

“Who in their right mind could possible want a devious, morally bankrupt mouth breather … as President and Commander in Chief?”

Interesting what you just said there. Anyone who doesn’t care for bush, have anything to say about this?

[Eagle]

I'm not going to do YOUR homework for you, because I would have to perform the same search to find the actual citations. You will need to search the USC (or United States Code), and the UCMJ, or Uniform Code of Military Justice. It's in there. Look for terms like "consorting with the enemy" and "giving aid and comfort to the enemy." In the USC also look for exactly who is authorized to carry out international diplomacy. You'll find it is the Executive Branch, not even the Congress. And certainly not the military, or individuals acting without any authority whatsoever.

How did his actions prolong the war? By conveying to the North that the people of the United States were not firmly committed to the prosecution of the war, thus encouraging them to kill more of our soldiers and to torture more American prisoners, so as to make the war even less palatable to the American populace.

Without people like Kerry and Jane Fonda, the North would have lost the will to fight. They have publicly admitted so. It's interesting that Jane Fonda has apologized to America for her actions, but Kerry has not. And Fonda was a civilian movie actress, while Kerry was a commissioned officer in the United States Navy.

[Sarge]

Read "A Viet Cong Memoir" by Truong Nhu Tang. Tang was the Minister of Justice during the war. He talks in part about how the politically situation in America helped the war effort for them. They were actually very politically aware of us and how to manipulate as well. I'm sure there are books out there which do a better job of it showing it.

Interesting book as well because it would appear we were screwed from the begininning. Also appears that in essence there were two wars going on at the time. The second one was all mind games and back channel planning by the Cong (communists) from North who after we left went on to pretty much oust the folks from the South who had helped them. The South merely wanted independence for the country and the North wanted communist rule for the country.

Sarge

[JeffV]

How did his actions prolong the war? By conveying to the North that the people of the United States were not firmly committed to the prosecution of the war, thus encouraging them to kill more of our soldiers and to torture more American prisoners, so as to make the war even less palatable to the American populace.

Without people like Kerry and Jane Fonda, the North would have lost the will to fight. They have publicly admitted so. It's interesting that Jane Fonda has apologized to America for her actions, but Kerry has not. And Fonda was a civilian movie actress, while Kerry was a commissioned officer in the United States Navy. Comparing what Kerry did and what Fonda did is just another example of "spin." I'm not defending Kerry, it just wasn't the same act.

If you're looking to blame someone for conveying a lack of commitment to the Viet Nam war, blame our Senators and our House of Representatives. Anti-war demonstrations were taking place in virtually every city in the US. BLAME THE MAJORITY of the of the US population. Was the National Guard justified at Kent State because protesting students were treasonists, and prolonging the war?

There is a difference between commitment to a war (that history appears to have interpreted as a mistake) and commitment to "winning" at any cost. What would be so different today if we had "won?" Would it somehow justify the 53,000 + dead & MIA?

I think any reference made to those time during this election do more harm to Bush's reelection hopes than they do Kerry's.

You want to bring up Viet-Nam and things that happened at that time? Tell us what you know about "the dark side" About "Friendly fire" deaths of overzealous LTs, about ear collections, About Mai Lai......... Or maybe it's just better to let it go.

[Renklaf]

There is a shrine dedicated to Kerry in Hanoi(I think) for what he did for the VC.

[Fergie]

Comparing what Kerry did and what Fonda did is just another example of "spin." I'm not defending Kerry, it just wasn't the same act.

If you're looking to blame someone for conveying a lack of commitment to the Viet Nam war, blame our Senators and our House of Representatives. Anti-war demonstrations were taking place in virtually every city in the US. BLAME THE MAJORITY of the of the US population. Was the National Guard justified at Kent State because protesting students were treasonists, and prolonging the war?



Did the kids at Kent State go to Paris and meet with the enemy?

[JeffV]

Did the kids at Kent State go to Paris and meet with the enemy?
No. But they died demonstrating for what they believed in.

Does that make them heros?

How do think wars conclude? Do we just kill them all, or do we talk?

[Fergie]

No. But they died demonstrating for what they believed in.

Does that make them heros?

How do think wars conclude? Do we just kill them all, or do we talk?
Read back a couple posts as to who has the power in the U.S. government to conduct talks and negotiations.

I'll give you one guess as to who CAN'T do it.

Fergie

[Captain Ron]

The usual drivel.

There are some pretty upstanding names on those lists.

There are plenty of inaccuracies.

* John Wayne
Cheap shot.

* Ronald Reagan
Who'da thought, at the time of his election to office?

* Bob Kerrey
Ooops...

Nice to see he threw in John McCain as a token piece...That guy has more balls than the all the Dem's combined.* Daniel Inouye
This guy may be the spoiler on that.

John McCain will always be more than just a "token piece".

Military service does not automatically legitimize a person for a political career, nor is it anywhere near de facto qualification for leadership of this nation, wartime or no.

--ron

[JeffV]

In no way am i condoning what Kerry did, but drastic times call for drastic measures. Some people believe "doing the right thing" is more important that "doing the the right way."

You may be old enough to vote, But your not old enough to judge.

Read back a couple posts as to who has the power in the U.S. government to conduct talks and negotiations.

I'll give you one guess as to who CAN'T do it.

Fergie

[Lou]

In no way am i condoning what Kerry did, but drastic times call for drastic measures.

Ditto.

As Captain Ron has already 'suggested', some you may want to view Fog Of War which is available on video. It's a bit of a bio on Robert McNamara, who was then the Sec. of Defence.

It gives a unique perspective of the war from the eyes of its reluctant architect.

For those that do not get the opportunity to view it, I will summarize as I think it relates to Kerry.

It was failure to 'communicate' with the enemy that caused the war to last as long as it did -- and possibly for it to have started in the first place.

[Fergie]

Some people believe "doing the right thing" is more important that "doing the the right way."

He didnt even do it the right way. He did it at the expense of his fellow service men, by bad-mouthing them and denigrating them.

You may be old enough to vote, But your not old enough to judge.

And you may be old enough to remember, but age and wisdom dont always go hand in hand.

Fergie

[JeffV]

He didnt even do it the right way. He did it at the expense of his fellow service men, by bad-mouthing them and denigrating them. Fergie
That is only an opinion, not a fact.......... an interpretation of a minute spot on a timeline that was 19 years long.

If Kerry had committed a treasonist act or other attrocity why do you think he was he never prosecuted?

Believe it or not there is a not-so-simple, but logical explaination.


And you may be old enough to remember, but age and wisdom dont always go hand in hand.

Fergie
Thanks for pointing that out. When we're young, the line between right and wrong seem to be narrow and well defined. As we get older those lines start to get fuzzy. Not just because our eyesight is deteriorating, but because we recognize that sometimes we don't get to make a simple right/wrong decisions. Sometimes there is no "right." Sometimes we have to make a choice between the lesser of two, three, four or even more evils......... but we only get to choose one.

Like I said, I don't condone what Kerry did, but I have a basic familiarity with the circumstances that led to his decision, as I'm sure the prosecutors of that time did. For that reason, I won't judge him.

In my opinion those who choose to persecute someone for a decision they made, without a thorough understanding of the circumstances, help to create an atmoshere of where apathy will rule.

[Darky]

So we shouldnt have a democary here in this great country?

What was Kerrys rank, while in vietnam? I didnt know he was a general or something higher. How did he lengthen tthe war and help jeopardize POWs?

XJZ will you please answer my question. I want a straight answer, please.
He did answer your question. I've put the question answered in bold. As to Kerry's rank? He was much, much lower than a general. He was a lieutenant. And I don't see how speaking against someone who betrayed his fellow sailors, soldiers, and Marines is saying we shouldn't have a democracy.

[Fergie]

You make good points and I see what you are saying, but still disagree about Kerry. If he had not come on to the Presidential scene boasting to a be a war hero(not his exact words, just my view), then I would not have a problem with him. However, he has based a lot of his credibility on the fact that he fought for our country, but if you look at what he has done, you'd think that he didnt want anything to do with not only the countyr, but his brothers in arms. And that is where my major complaint is, in the fact that he hung other soldiers out to dry so he could leverage himself into a better political view.

I think that he wasnt prosecuted because too many others wanted to save face and keep their political appointments. Then again, not being fully aware of the political situation at the time, I can only guess.

The view of a fuzzy right and wrong is a means of explaining away an issue when someone that has the power to make the decision, doesnt actually have the cojones or the ability to stand up and say, "This is what I feel is right, and that is what I based my decision on." If a person believes strongly enough, there is no lesser of two evils, one is right and the other is wrong.

As far as understanding the circumstances, you are correct, I do not understand. I was not alive in that era, and have a very limited view of the world still. However, I know what I feel to be right and wrong, and what Kerry did was wrong to me.

And just a bit curious here, JeffV, did you ever serve in the military?

Fergie

[Darky]

That is only an opinion, not a fact That is a fact. The fact is that the executive branch is the only right way to negotiate with the enemy.
Our appeal notes both Kerry's violations of the UCMJ (Article 104 part 904) and U.S. Code (18 USC Sec. 2381 and 18 USC Sec. 953), and calls for his disqualification for public office in accordance with the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, which states: "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."<----That's for Z22. Hopefully that explains to you how Kerry was wrong. And here is how Kerry contributed to making the war drag on longer: ...if not for the disunity created by such stateside protesters, Hanoi would have ultimately surrendered...
I don't blame Kerry necessarily for speaking out on what he saw as wrong, but at the same time I say he could've picked a better time. A time when he wasn't home from his shortened tour with 3 Purple Hearts he put himself in for while others are still over there fighting, dying, and being tortured; receiving wounds of a much worse nature than any he received without writing your own citations. A time when the enemy couldn't use his own words against his fellow fighting men. And I don't dislike him for a decision but for many. His Silver Star citation has been rewritten twice. Glenn correct me if I'm wrong on this, but your citation can only be rewritten if the details are wrong. I.E. It says you defended your base against 50 enemy when it was 15. Or your name is John Forbes Kerry, but it says Hanoi John, etc. His had all the details correct but it was reworded to sound better, to avoid sounding like he killed an unarmed man by shooting him in the back as he fled. Her's the link to that info: click here (http://kerry-04.org/war/citations.php)

[JeffV]

The view of a fuzzy right and wrong is a means of explaining away an issue when someone that has the power to make the decision, doesnt actually have the cojones or the ability to stand up and say, "This is what I feel is right, and that is what I based my decision on." If a person believes strongly enough, there is no lesser of two evils, one is right and the other is wrong.
I believe to do SOMETHING or NOTHING was the root choice. Doing nothing is also wrong. I also believe anything that was following "politically correct" procedures of the time would have equated to doing nothing.

And just a bit curious here, JeffV, did you ever serve in the military? Fergie
Yes, I was in the last draft. I didn't know if I would be called, and a tour in Viet Nam didn't have the "political glamor" and "Hero Status" that the current war does so I opted to Join the Navy (AKA Grey canoe club). Nixon was President. I went through the transition when If you were 18 you could die for your country but were too young to vote. I served my time. Spent time in the far east. The greatest lesson learned was "there's no place like home." Closest I got to Nam was about 24 miles from shore. Got married in my Dress Blues. I'm proud of my country, but not it's politics.

[Fergie]

I'm proud of my country, but not it's politics.

I don't believe it has been put better. Good thing about the U.S.A. is that you won't get killed, imprisoned or carried off in the middle of the night if you don't agree.


The something or nothing thought doesnt apply to Kerry in this situation. He was not the one to make a decision as to what to do. He was an Lt. and did not even come close to having the power to make decisions and negotiate.

Also, there were people doing something. People that were authorized to be in Paris at the talks, where Kerry had no reason to be.

Fergie

[JeffV]

I don't believe it has been put better. Good thing about the U.S.A. is that you won't get killed, imprisoned or carried off in the middle of the night if you don't agree.
That's not entirely true. 3 things come to mind.

Japaneese internment camps - WW2
Kent State - 1970
The National Strategy For Homeland Security - today

[Fergie]

That's not entirely true. 3 things come to mind.

Japaneese internment camps - WW2
Kent State - 1970
The National Strategy For Homeland Security - today

Boy, you are some kind of pessimist. The first two were isolated incidents, and you are grasping for straws with the third.

Take a look at Staling, Lenin, or any number of dictatorships and that is what I am talking about.

Fergie

[Urban Redneck]

Kent State - 1970



Now where is my National Guard 4-Kent State 0 shirt..... :spin1:

[JeffV]

Boy, you are some kind of pessimist. The first two were isolated incidents, and you are grasping for straws with the third.

Take a look at Staling, Lenin, or any number of dictatorships and that is what I am talking about.

Fergie
Yeah, there's a fine line between realist and pessimist.

Isolated or not, they're real, not imagined.

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
George Santayana


The National Strategy For Homeland Security is full of "holes" that are capable of seriously infringing upon your constitutional rights. The're already being used on "suspected" terrorists.

Before you ask, NO I will not give examples to back up my statment. Look it up. Read it and interpret it yourself.

I'd like to sit here all day and play games with the NAXJA debate team, but I have a real life I gotta tend to.

I'm goin' back to lurk mode.

[Fergie]

Before you ask, NO I will not give examples to back up my statment. Look it up. Read it and interpret it yourself.

I'd like to sit here all day and play games with the NAXJA debate team, but I have a real life I gotta tend to.

I'm goin' back to lurk mode.


I do my own homework, and not once have I said that I support the National Strategy. I just find it interesting that you seem to be so against President Bush, or for Kerry actions as it is. It just appears to me that you are some disenfranchised person that some kind of grudge against the United States and the Government.

Have fun in lurk mode. I'm gonna keep my mouth shut until the 3rd unless someone posts something retarded. Good discussion are always fun, dont get this level of thought at the college level.

Fergie

[Eagle]

No. But they died demonstrating for what they believed in.

Does that make them heros?

How do think wars conclude? Do we just kill them all, or do we talk?
Talking is fine. Jeff, the point is that under our Constitution and our legal system, we have a branch of government that is specifically empowered to negotiate with representatives of governments with whom we are at war. That branch is the Executive branch. It is illegal for other branches of government to undertake negotiations with the enemy, and it is illegal for individuals to undertake negotiations with the enemy. What John Kerry did was treasonous. The kids at Kent State were exercisiong a Constitutional right to assemble and make their views known. I can't believe you don't understand the difference.

[Eagle]

If Kerry had committed a treasonist act or other attrocity why do you think he was he never prosecuted?
For one reason, and one reason only: He was then, as he is now, a personal friend of the Kennedies.

[Eagle]

I believe to do SOMETHING or NOTHING was the root choice. Doing nothing is also wrong. I also believe anything that was following "politically correct" procedures of the time would have equated to doing nothing.
There is a radical difference between being "politically incorrect" and violating the Constitution, the United States Code, AND the Uniform Code of Military Justice. We're not talking about whether or not he should have adhered to "politically correct" procedures, we're talking about whether or not he should have broken the law he had sworn an oath as an officer in the United States Navy to uphold.

[Eagle]

I don't believe it has been put better. Good thing about the U.S.A. is that you won't get killed, imprisoned or carried off in the middle of the night if you don't agree.
Unless you attend Kent State University ...

[Darky]

I wasn't there (or even alive at the time) but I can't hellp but wonder if possibly the students may have gotten somewhat rowdy. I don't think that the National Guardsmen would've just started shooting unless they were somehow threatened. But like I said, I wasn't even alive, nor do I know much about the circumstances. Just throwing an idea out there.

[steve01XJ]

What separates Bush from Kerry?

Strateegery.

I don't hide who I support and I can back up what I believe in with more than blind faith, ignorance, and the re-treading of the talk radio and talk tv pundits. Yeah, I like wheeling, but it's not a voting issue for me. There is a lot more at stake than my few hours a year on the trails. The Supreme Court, woman's right to choose, jobs, health care, exportation of labor, exploitation of labor, fully funded education, urban renewal, immigration, privacy, civil liberties, infrastructure, oil prices, foreign policy, the axissss of evil, the war on terrrrr.... I doubt very seriously that a Kerry presidency would end wheeling. I think he would likely be pre-occupied with more important things.

A lot is at stake this time as there is a clear choice of direction to go. For me it is Kerry. For many of you it is Bush. None of us is likely to convince anyone to jump ship at this point. All I hope is that everyone votes their conscience after a reasoned analysis of the issues. If what is going on in Chicago today as I see people going to the polls in Lincoln Park and what I saw early this morning in the heavily Republican district of the suburbs which I live in is happening everywhere else in the country, we are in for a HUGE voter turnout. Historically that is not good for Republicans or incumbents. Even our monument to Republicanism Phil Crane is likely to go down in a district that is heavily Republican.

All I hope for now is that we will not have to decide the election in the courts.

[red91]

Listen up, little boy, and listen well.

What more does he need to say?

Nice. And you did it all in ONE SENTENCE !! We're not worthy, we're not worthy !! :worship:

Oh and by the way eagle...Thanks for going... I was only, depending on the year, 0-8 yrs old.

[Eagle]

Oh and by the way eagle...Thanks for going... I was only, depending on the year, 0-8 yrs old.
1968.

And believe me, it wasn't MY idea!