Amazing huh. AT least he served.
The following is VERY true
I am angry that so many of the sons of the powerful and well-placed... managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units... Of the many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal and owe equal allegiance to their country."
- Colin Powell's autobiography,
My American Journey, p. 148 "
"DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) -- Vice President Dick Cheney's questioning of John Kerry's war record and his ability to protect America is "cowardly," Sen. Tom Harkin said Monday.
"It just outrages me that someone who got five deferments during Vietnam and said he had 'other priorities' at that time would say that," said the Iowa Democrat, a former Navy fighter pilot."
Now... Bush's "military" service???
Whey would they question Kerry's service, when they did not serve?
Bush and Cheney ...what a pair to bring up military service!!!
You don't think that the Vietnam War was right and state that our leaders had lied to us about it, but you are angry that Kerry protested that war. That doesn't make any sense. If people didn't protest that war, it would have gone on for many more years than it did.
Also Kennedy was not responsible for that war. He was willing to arm and train the Vietnamese to fight it. The communist countries were doing that for their side. It would have been wrong if we didn't help those who didn't want to live under communism. However, when that didn't work it was Johnson who turned it into our war. There is a big difference. I don't believe that Kennedy would have done that because he didn't do it with Cuba.
One other point - you complain that they didn't let us win. How could we win? Since Vietnam didn't attack us or threaten to attack us, why were we there? We claimed it was to help the Vietnamese people who didn't want to live under communism. How could we bomb them helter skelter if we were there to help them? It couldn't be won.
I was referring to 9-11 numb nuts, not the murder rate in NYC. And no amounts of deaths somewhere else alleviate the pain of another one. The point was that you seem to think this is the worst and most senseless war we have ever fought. You need to catch up on your history lessons. Try doing a search on the Spanish American War, Vietnam, the Mexican-American war, just as a few easy examples.
But Johnson and McNamara weren't held accountable for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which wasn't based on faulty intelligence but an intentional lie and passed by the idiots in Congress. What is the precedence for now holding politicians responsible for war deaths?
What other options were there? We all but begged the UN to help out, but they were too busy profiting from the Oil for Food graft.
We all but begged the French, Germans and Russians, but their construction and weapons contracts with the Iraqi's were too valuable and they didn't think Bush would attack if they didn't help. Surprise and now all those contracts are worthless paper�now you know why they don�t like Bush.
He might yet go, but not because of ideas like yours.
The fact that there were more murders in NYC than in Iraq is supposed to mke those deaths OK? That is a convienent ratioalization if I ever heard one. I think Johnson and McNamara should have been held accountable for the "Gulf of Tonkin Resolution." It was based, as was Bush's reason for going to war, on BULL
What is it that you keep reminding us of about pigs and pearls? This dude fits the pig part and wouldn't know a pearl if he chocked on it.
Thanks for the defensive move, but with this particular poster it is neither required nor effective.
You're lack of intelligence and attention to previous posts on this board is the only thing obvious to me after reading this post.
I served. I volunteered. I was called names when I returned; I was flipped off walking through the SF airport while in uniform. I my mind what Kerry did in his war protests puts him in the same category as those ignorant folks. I am willing to forgive him that error in judgment if he will quit claiming that his four months in charge of a large bass boat in some way qualifies him for President.
If he has skills and ideas that qualify him, let�s hear them and shut the hell up about a war no one wanted and cost this country a lot more than Iraq ever will. I am willing to give him a chance to educate me about his views and to convince me he has a better idea. Thus far he has failed; not on content but on volume. He has no ideas that he has put out except that he will convince the rest of the UN that he is such a nice guy that they need to spend massive amounts of money and lives to help us out...Yeah right!
I hated that war, but loved my country. I hated Kennedy, Johnson and McNamara while they lied to an entire nation. I hated that they sent us to fight and wouldn't let us win.
There are still less dead in Iraq that were killed in NYC. There are still less dead in Iraq after a year than in a week in Vietnam.
You may not agree with the reasons, but I seriously doubt that Bush�s decision to send troops into harms way was an easy or quick decision.
Is he to be held more accountable than Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon? If so why?
You need to pay more attention to what you're posting and make sure you have a clue about what you're writing.
There is nothing you could ever post that would cause me to use it in my voting decision.
winholder is not a Kerry hater. I consider him to be one of the most objective posters here, and I feel confident that any negative feelings he may hold regarding Kerry's qualifications are the result of due consideration.
He is also a Viet Nam vet.
Tom Harkin LIED about his service during Vietnam. He deliberately misled the public into believing he was a Vietnam Navy pilot who was engaged in combat, when, in fact, he was stationed in Japan and merely "FERRIED" aircraft between Vietnam and Japan for Maintenance and repair.
Please don't take my word for this. The information is readily available for anyone interested in the truth.
Now, Mr. weeherman...
Don't try to insert logic into this argument. You will only confuse those who choose to trash what Kerry did in 'Nam. They have little ability to distinguish between someone who volunteered to go to Southeast Asia and someone who chose to party down playing pilot safely here in the States.
It takes guts when running for an office with the power and responsibility of the President to claim four months as a "military career" that warrants hero status.
I think this issue will cloud all other important issues in the campaign. When will Kerry begin to talk about something other than his "military career", which is meaningless?
The only important thing about his military record is the truth; is it as Kerry says, or as other say? We will likely never know the full truth and it should not be a deciding factor in this coming election.
We all need for these fools to get past this and show us what they really plan to do.