Close Topic Options

Politics - The Next US President? - Page 16

While I am not a Kerry supporter, I think the term self inflicted wound in this situation is really not fair and is, in fact, misleading. Most of us consider self-inflicted to be intentional. I might even say self-inflicted if he was cleaning a weapon that hadn't been properly emptied. However, this sounds more like a "friendly fire" incident than a "self-inflicted" incident.

President US The Politics

Actually, I am only reporting what I read. I don't have much of an opinion either way.

I can't find the "self-inflicted wound" quote right now, but I have seen it several places. The point is that he deliberately shot the mortar at boulders along the river, that were fairly close to his boat. It was shrapnel from one of these shots that caused the wound. It wasn't deliberate, but it was caused by his own actions and his own negligence. This is according to the allegations. It wasn't "friendly fire", since he was the one who shot the mortar.

I am willing to acknowledge him as a "hero" from Vietnam, but that just makes my disgust about his post-Vietnam activities even worse, wherein he maligned ALL of the military involvement there, including both the undisputed heroes and the undisputed scoundrels.

As Bob Dole pointed out to him a couple of days ago, Americans like "quiet heroes". Kerry is the exact opposite, continuously throwing his "heroism" in everyone's faces, then whining when someone questions him about it.

As far as I am concerned, the fact that the Communist museum in Vietnam considers Lt. John F. Kerry a hero to the Communist cause because of his anti-American activities just shows how much of a traitor he was then. His continuing refusal to retract any of his claims and apologize to the men and women he maligned also shows his attitude towards the military.

The Swift Boat Veterans discussion can't possibly make my disgust about this man any worse. As far as I am concerned, he is one of the worst possible candidates for the office of Commander-in-Chief of the US military.

I can't even say that the Swift Boat Veterans give me any more fuel for this attitude, since their allegations are far milder than the undisputed truth of his activities since Vietnam, including his many votes against the military while serving as a Senator.

I would like to reiterate that it is Mr. Kerry who has brought up Vietnam. By his continued harping on this theme, he makes his own record there part of the discussion.

Politics - The Next US President? History & Civil Business Politics

Kerry spoke the truth in 1971 -- atrocities WERE committed by American troops (anyone ever heard of the My Lai Massacre?). The truth can be ugly and painful, but sometimes we have to look it squarely in the face in order to put an end to the cause of that ugliness and pain. I can understand why some veterans were angered by testimony that detailed atrocities committed by American troops, but the primary goal of Kerry and the organization he led -- Vietnam Veterans Against the War -- was to bring our troops home so they would no longer be put in situations where atrocities were committed by and against them. Millions of Southeast Asians and 58,000 Americans were killed, with many times those numbers wounded in body and mind. The Vietnam war was one huge atrocity, and I won't condemn anyone who avoided going there. Kerry volunteered for hazardous duty after serving a full tour aboard a navy ship, served with honor and distinction, and when he came home he devoted his efforts to ending the senseless slaughter. This neither qualifies nor disqualifies him for the presidency, but in my opinion it speaks well of his character as a young man.

Page 16 President US The Politics

My question is why is Kerry so concerned about the ads that the Swift Boat Veterans are airing? If he is as confident in his war record and achievements as he says he is, and is willing to use it as such a huge part of his election campaign, then he should be willing and ready to field questions and concerns over it. McCain and Dole both used war records (not to the length that Kerry has) in their election campaigns, and both went through rigorous scrutiny and finger pointing, by the media and the opposing parties. This is an election campaign, and Kerry has to realize that dirt will be drudged up. The question is, how will he deal with it, and so far, he isnt doing a very good job of that.

President US The Politics

I hold to the opinion that Kerry's activities in protest of the war, where he parrotted the communist propaganda, claiming that ALL US military in Vietnam were committing the atrocities, was treason. He even claimed that HE HIMSELF committed such atrocities. If that is so, rather than running for president, he should be submitting himself to the International Court for trial as a war criminal. And he should DEFINITELY be praising (as should you) President Bush for not ever going to Vietnam.

Instead, MoveOn.org continues to harp on the fact that President Bush was "AWOL", and, after all, was only in the National Guard, arranged by his rich daddy, to keep him out of the war. (Never mind that he was a fighter pilot, and that many, many National Guard units, especially fighter squadrons, went to Vietnam.) Of course, Kerry is just as much a part of MoveOn.org as President Bush is a part of the Swift Boat Veterans, if not more. So, since the Democrats keep yelling for Bush to reign in the Swift Boat Veterans, why don't they call for Kerry to reign in MoveOn and the other leftist 527s?

Kerry's words were used, specifically, by Russian and North Vietnamese POW camp directors to break the morale of POWs. His work did nothing to shorten the war, but rather gave aid and comfort to the enemy, (which is documented, by the way) giving them reason to believe that they could win. Which they did. Then immediately proceeded to murder millions of people in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. It also gave more comfort to China, which has continued this practice of murder to this day.

And Kerry still refuses to apologize to the many honorable men who served at that time, and still refuses to open up his own military records. Yet he wants us to believe that based on his 4 months service in Vietnam, and his years of work AGAINST the US, he is qualified to be the Commander in Chief.

---

Update:
John O'Neil, author of Unfit for Command, has an article in the OpinionJournal today, about why the Swift Boat Veterans group was formed. Read about their own reasons, instead of why everyone else THINKS they have done this.

Edited: Nighthawk on 27th Aug, 2004 - 12:52pm

Politics - The Next US President?

Wow! I didn't realize that Kerry said each and every U.S. soldier was a war criminal, that he was actually in league with communist propagandists, helped the North to win the war, and paved the way for millions to be murdered in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia!

Kerry is much more powerful than I thought. Either that, or the right-wing spin machine has the power to make their followers embrace such ludicrous hyperbole.

Prior to his testimony, Kerry had met with Vietnam veterans in Detroit who told him of what they had done or personally witnessed. Those atrocities are an ugly fact of that war, and American citizens have a right to know what is going on and what is being done in our names.

Kerry worked to put an end to such atrocities and to spare his fellow soldiers from unecessary horror and death. We eventually pulled out of Vietnam because of falling public support, and if Kerry helped to shorten that war by even one day then I commend him for it.

And if speaking the TRUTH in America is TREASON, then we are in much bigger trouble than I thought.

Politics The US President - Page 16

Thanks for the sarcasm. Here are some quotes:

OK, it wasn't ALL the military, just ALL the military OFFICERS (of which he was one). So, if he knew of war crimes, and did nothing about them, then he is guilty of war crimes, and not fit to be president of the US. When will he submit himself to the War Crimes court in Europe?

Did Kerry have any effect on the war in Vietnam? Look at this article.

How does this compare to what Senator John McCain has reported about his treatment in Vietnam?

Although I can't find them right now, we have sworn testimony of two different POWs, who were in different camps, who had Kerry's testimony used against them as justification for their continued imprisonment and torture.

I think that Kerry DID help the North Vietnamese win the war, as his testimony directly affected the sympathies of people in the US. He continuously called for immediate disengagement and withdrawal from Vietnam (similar to the calls from the Left today, regarding Iraq). We did, and the direct result of that disengagement and withdrawal was the murders of tens of millions of people throughout SE Asia.

I am NOT saying that there were no atrocities in Vietnam. There were, on both sides. And most, if not all, of the US people who committed them were disciplined appropriately. Kerry indicated that most, if not all, military members participated in these atrocities, on a daily basis. History has NOT shown this to be true.

Again, Kerry gave aid and comfort to the enemy, during a time of war. That is the definition of treason. Much of what he said was lies, and even the former propaganda masters of the Soviet Union claim that what he said to the Foreign Relations Committee and to the press came directly from THEIR works.

---

Update:
I just found this little tidbit:

These come from this article about the different ways Vietnamese people in Vietnam and the US view Mr. Kerry.

Edited: Nighthawk on 28th Aug, 2004 - 5:29pm

Politics The US President Politics Business Civil & History - Page 16

I've had my say on this subject. The commentary below is from a Libertarian web site, by James Glaser who served in Vietnam:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/glaser/glaser22.html
SAD TO SAY, KERRY SPOKE THE TRUTH

Now we hear that many Vietnam veterans are upset with John Kerry, because he testified to Congress back in 1971, about Americans committing war crimes while serving in Vietnam.

The sad thing is that Kerry was telling the truth. While the vast majority of veterans behaved honorably, there were still thousands and thousands who did not. Even if only ½ of 1% committed a crime, that could add up to 45,000 bad American soldiers and Marines.

Just maybe the men offended by Kerry's testimony never saw any combat or they were the ones committing the crimes and are feeling guilty. It has been widely reported that between one and three million innocent Vietnamese civilians were killed in the war. Somebody did that killing and that is a crime.

People ask why if Kerry knew about these crimes he didn't stop them. Here is the attitude I had over in the Nam: you f___ with me and you are dead. Somebody shoots a gook and you start to say something, chances are pretty good that you will be dead too. I cannot tell you how many senior enlisted men and officers were killed by our own troops, but I bet it was in the thousands.

Some sick Americans just liked to kill gooks. "The only good gook is a dead gook." I saw guys with collections of ears and fingers. They were pretty strange and scary. Lots of guys were strung out on smack and who knows what they would do to get more.

ROK Marines kept heads on sticks in front of their compound. War gets crazy and some Americans got crazy too. They kill and rape and do even more terrible stuff than that. It made me sick. My government tortured women and children to death.

Kerry was telling the truth and some Americans cannot handle the truth.

War is a crime.