Draginol Draginol

Moral Bankruptcy in the left?

▼

Moral Bankruptcy in the left?

Now they care about war experience?

from JoeUser Forums

So now Kerry is trying to make an issue that Cheney got a deferrment for going to Vietnam? Are they seriously? Wasn't the last Democratic President an outright draft dodger? Since when is Vietnam war fighting experience a big deal to Democrats?

politics
14,158 views 47 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
if you read this with anything close to some objectivity, you might understand that kerry was telling the committee about the failures of the administration and the defense department in prosecuting the war in vietnam and the damage those failures were doing to the troops engaged in combat. the excesses there--just as those recently exposed in abu gharib--were the results of flawed policy for which he blamed the president, his advisers and the way those policies were executed by top level of command. his motivation was sympathy for the ordinary combat soldiers who were not only having to fight a determined enemy but at the same time deal with ranking officers who frequently were so caught up in racking up body counts to advance their own careers, they needlessly and frequently puttheir troops' lives in danger. the violations of geneva accords he refers to were not committed by rogue soldiers (things like freefire zones, use of inappropriate weapons in areas proximate to civilian noncombatants, etc) they were part and parcel of officially authorized (and therefore 'orders') rules of engagement. his ultimate intent was to provide the senators with a non-whitewashed view of what was happening in vietnam--as opposed to the pie-in-the-sky coverups they received from the command--in hopes of getting them to bring the war to an end and the troops home and out of harms way.


Please reread "my" statement. True he gave them facts about a failed administration, but again that's the kind of stuff they were looking for!
And yes I know that's an abridged version. I did not think it prudent to post the "whole" thing. See the problem here "kingbee" is the stuff he was talking about happening everyday just "didn't"! Which is one of the main reasons that he has all these vet groups gunning for his scalp. And before you say it, no if Kerry was not running for the highest office in America we probably would "never" have heard from them. But he's asking us to make him commander-in-chief with that kind of BS hanging around his neck.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top

stuff he was talking about happening everyday just "didn't"!


you were there?

Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #27 By: kingbee - 9/8/2004 6:44:58 AM
stuff he was talking about happening everyday just "didn't"!



you were there?


No but..... (you had to know that was coming, there's "always" a but) Do "very close" family and friends count? Say a brother an uncle and 2 1st cousins in 2 different branches of the service (Army and Navy)? And now, turn the question around..... were "you" there? If not, how do you know for certain that it did happen the way he says? And by the way, if it did happen that way do you "really" think that the vet groups would be going after Kerry? They would have to know that the"really" bad stuff would come out against them. "Plus" you don't hear Sen Kerry refuting their charges now do you? No......he just wants to shut them up. Does that not make you stop and think?
Reply #29 from PolMach Forums Top
The "Texans for Truth" is going to backfire on Kerry. It's just another example of the left not "getting it". They're totally out of touch with mainstream Americans.

The left not "getting" what? That Kerry dropped 18 points in some states after the damaging S.B.V.T. ads, that turnabout is fair play and people aren't responding to anything that doesn't hold an agressive tone? Kerry is only following where the Bush supporters lead. To me that makes Kerry look even more weak.
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top

It is interesting that the very same Democrats who complained so loudly about the Swift boat ads -- even though Bush and Cheney had nothing to do with them and have publicly stated that they believe Kerry was a war hero -- are now pathetically trying to dig up about deferrments. Talk about a losing strategy. Yea, Dick Cheney and tens of millions of other Americans got deferrments too.  Not that that matters because the last Democratic president was an outright draft dodger.

Kingbee: You want to talk about blinded by partisanship, look in the mirror.  There is a big difference between Bush/Cheney questioning the POLICIES of John Kerry, which are a matter of record and questioning his patriotism.  On the other hand, Kerry has now sunk into the Swift boat mud and is personally doing what he had just condemned the swift boat people from doing.

And now we have this "Texans for truth" stuff.  Tell me, is Kerry going to publicly condemn that ad just as he demanded Bush do for the Swift Boat ads (and as a reminder, Bush has condemned all the 527 ads including the swift boat ads).

BTW, I'm not complaining about Kerry sinking into the mud. This is going to kill his campaign. Mark my words. People don't like blatant hypocricy. And you can argue that the Swift boat ads were unfair all day long but now we're talking Kerry himself, after MUCH bellyaching doing the same kind of stuff. That's not going to fly with people.

Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top

They would have to know that the"really" bad stuff would come out against them


once again, youre characterizing this as kerry accusing ordinary infantry/aircav guys of really bad stuff.  that wasnt the case.  read the testimony.  he's condemning the command for having created a climate in which the horrible seemed normal...situations in which average american kids who were told they were going to be performing a noble mission found themselves killing civilians who happened to be an freefire zones.  it's very similar to the situation at abu gharib (as ive said previously) in that the people who are really to blame arent the mps who were poorly trained and overwhelmed.  it was the assholes in charge who put them in an insane situation without proper training and encouraged them or looked the other way.

Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top
And by the way, if it did happen that way he said it did do you "really" think that the vet groups would be going after Kerry? They would have to know that the"really" bad stuff would come out against them. "Plus" you don't hear Sen Kerry refuting their charges now do you? No......he just wants to shut them up. Does that not make you stop and think?


Once again what I was trying to say has been ignored! What he said just didn't happen the way he said it did!
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
Gideon you are very correct to a point. At least VP Cheney got his differments "legaly" whereas Ex Pres Clinton did not (draft dodging jerk)! Of course most true Demo's seem to forget that small fact!


Uhh, actually, again, irrelevant. Clinton's and Cheney's reasons for avoiding a war that ended 30 years ago have nothing to do with their present heart condition.
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top
Okay your right and I goofed. But in reality this blog is about: Moral Bankruptcy in the left?

And heart conditions just don't fit.
Reply #35 from PolMach Forums Top
I think from what the news states from papers to internet to TV, that Bill Clinton's condition was do to his high-saturated fat diet.

Anyone know when exactly Cheney developed his heart condition, and here's what I heard on Cheney someone can debunk it if it is not true, but I heard he is not going to run for President in 2008, which is leaving the ticket open for the first time to elect a non-incumbent candidate from both Parties. I think they were talking about McCain, Gulliani, etc.

Gulliani / McCain in 2008 or if an amendment is done, Gulliani / Schwarznegger in 2008, or something to that effect.

once again, youre characterizing this as kerry accusing ordinary infantry/aircav guys of really bad stuff. that wasnt the case. read the testimony. he's condemning the command for having created a climate in which the horrible seemed normal...situations in which average american kids who were told they were going to be performing a noble mission found themselves killing civilians who happened to be an freefire zones. it's very similar to the situation at abu gharib (as ive said previously) in that the people who are really to blame arent the mps who were poorly trained and overwhelmed. it was the assholes in charge who put them in an insane situation without proper training and encouraged them or looked the other way.


If Senator McCain said it was bad that Kerry did that, don't you think he knew what he was talking about, or is being a United State Senator and a Vietnam P.O.W. still not enough for proof?
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
if an amendment is done, Gulliani / Schwarznegger in 2008, or something to that effect.


If an amendment is done, I may honestly, seriously look at other countries for options. In making such an amendment, we would not be simply altering the amendments that have been issued since the constitution came about, we would be ripping the very fabric of the constitution and the intent of the founding fathers. We would open the door to a complete and total elimination of ALL of the freedoms provided by the constitution, and that frightens me.

If the GOP doesn't think they can come up with a candidate with equal charisma to Schwarzenneger, perhaps they need to reevaluate their own party.
Reply #37 from PolMach Forums Top
Hey it was just a joke, I know that is never going to happen, because nobody would like other countries sending in people for President, reason why it was put in the Constitution in the first place, as for equal Charisma to Schwarznegger, who has that, Harrison Ford? Hulk Hogan? Jesse Ventura? Donald Trump? I don't think there are a whole lot of people with the charisma of Schwaznegger in either party.

Realistic ticket would be in 2008:
Gulliani and McCain

Fantasy Ticket (What the hell since we are going fantasy.)
Angelina Jolie and Amy Smart in 2008, with me as an intern,
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #37 By: ShoZan - 9/8/2004 12:03:50 PM BR>Fantasy Ticket (What the hell since we are going fantasy.)
Angelina Jolie and Amy Smart in 2008, with me as an intern,


Yeah right.....But we all know that could never happen
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
shozan,

It would also be the first time in history that a concerted effort was made to assassinate the intern (to gain their position)
Reply #40 from PolMach Forums Top
Yeah I know, I would never see the light of day in order to protect my hide.
Reply #41 from PolMach Forums Top
Peace out you groovy chick.
Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
Kerry is only following where the Bush supporters lead.


HAH! This stuff gets good sometimes. Just another example of how stupid the left thinks we are. Let 'em think.

Cheers,
Daiwa
Reply #43 from PolMach Forums Top
HAH! This stuff gets good sometimes. Just another example of how stupid the left thinks we are. Let 'em think

Oooh. Dirty pool Daiwa! Calling me part of the left. That snowball had ice in it! I don't know if you've read my other messages in other forums, but one could hardly classify me as a leftist. Simply 'cause I'm part of the ABB crowd doesn't mean I'm no conservative. Back to the point, Kerry has not led an aggressive campaign until just recently, and it is pretty obvious he has lost a lot of ground because he has failed to be on the offensive. Do you not agree?
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
You're right, Def (pardon the pun) - my precision-detector failed me. Should have been: "...stupid the ABB crowd thinks we are."

But you gotta admit that's kinda funny, though, don't ya? Even coming from you? You really believe GW paved that path, huh?

Cheers,
Daiwa
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
Looking again at my last reply, I didn't really answer your question, Def.

I guess it depends what you mean by "being on the offensive." All the pundits are saying he was slow to react, yada yada, but what I was hearing out of him was pretty reactive. The perfect response, and probably the only one that had a real chance of salvaging his campaign in my view, would have been to join Bush in condemning all 527's and promptly changing the subject. That would have been a slick move. Now, his idea of going on the offensive appears to be to attack Bush's & Cheney's Viet Nam era service (or lack thereof, depending on your bias), and to repeatedly remind us how evil those attacking him are, just keeping the wound open & digging the hole deeper still. First rule when in a hole is to stop shoveling, but he can't let it go. And his "friends" keep tossing him bigger shovels.

I also think he was running a rather aggressive campaign before the SwiftBoat bruhaha, slamming Bush left & right as hard as he could ever since sewing up the nomination in March. His entire campaign up to the DNC was almost exclusively about how evil & wrong Bush has been (his opinion). I'd like to have a nickel for every time he's uttered the word "wrong."

Kind of ironic, really, that the ABB campaign has been AAB - All About Bush. I think many people find it hard to embrace someone who defines his reason for seeking office wholly in terms of his opponent. I know I do. His one attempt at making an affirmative case for himself was the completely transparent effort to magically transform himself into a military hero and make that the centerpiece of his convention triumph, to paint a picture of himself as the really smart & savvy CIC-in-waiting. Obviously, that hasn't worked out too well, and he seems to have little else to fall back on. I hate polls, but recent ones seem to be telling us that the undecideds are deciding, and starting to move into Bush's column (despite Zell Miller).

Cheers,
Daiwa
Reply #46 from PolMach Forums Top
Thank you for the thoughtful response. Let me be clear, I don't think Kerry is mister wonderful saviour of all that is democratic. I simply honestly feel betrayed by Patriot Act and feel mislead on the Iraq war. The best way I know how to let Washington know that I am unhappy is to make an example of however is in office despite their good posits on certain social / cultural issues such as abortion, gay marriage, gun rights, etc. .

Reply #47 from PolMach Forums Top
I simply honestly feel betrayed by Patriot Act and feel mislead on the Iraq war.


National Security, got to love it, because they are watching.