Anybody know if this is true about Kerry?

Thank you for that.

"I earn my green beret over and over daily in all aspects of my life."

Mine's black (pre-Shinseki), but I feel the same way. Made me smile.

 

Kerry was absolutely justified in protesting the war. It was an uglier and nastier war than most, with really no point whatsoever. Millions died for no reason.


And I have harped on this before, but it bears repeating:

Nixon and Kissenger sabotaged the Paris Peace talks just before the 1968 US election. Kissenger admits in his autobiography that he passed messages to the S. Vietnamese government that they should not make a deal under the Johnson administration because they could get a better deal under Nixon. The S. Viets walked out of the Paris talks days before the election. Why did Nixon and Kissenger sabatoge the talks?? B/c everyone knew how close the election was going to be and they believed that frustration with the Democratic war would increase the likelihood of Nixon beating Humphrey. They were right and Nixon won in a squeaker.

And Nixon ran on the platform that he had a secret plan to end the war. Five years later our troops were still dying for no cause or reason.

So who were the real traitors? Nixon and Kissenger. Kerry did the right thing in opposing the war, although I have no idea what kinds of things he said during his protests, so I will not support him blindly.

I wonder what Don Bendell would have to say about the traitorous acts of Nixon and Kissenger? Or is Bendell just another political partisan?

 

I'm glad he has the right to protest. If the story ended there we would have nothing to talk about. But it doesn't.

Interesting about Nixon, I was never a fan anyway. Won't even bring up LBJ. It gets worse.

 

Nixon and Kissinger aren't running for office right now.

Kerry has to be judged on his own actions as they relate to the claims and accusations he is making during this election campaign, not as to how they relate to the blame-levels of others concerning Vietnam.

There was no shortage of bad-guys and screw-ups and they were not all Americans (not defending Nixon here).

Kerry has made his veteran status and service a big part of his platform, he has to expect that his actions during that part of his life will be closely examined and criticzed. He opened the door to that line of questioning, counselor.

 

I guess if ANYONE has the right to protest a war, it would be the veterns of that war. Protesting a war is not treason. Not in this country, anyhow, not yet. Protesting a war and not supporting the troops fighting it are TWO completely different things.

Speaking of commies, does anyone remember that Reagan applied to the Communist party eons ago? Image how our history might be a little different if they hadn't denied his application...

 

"If mommie is a commie then you gotta turn her in
Oh, we're the John Birch Society, the John Birch Society
Fighting for the right to fight the right fight for the Right
..."

the Chad Mitchell Trio, mid `50's

 

Protesting a war is one thing.

Accusing your fellow soldiers of war atrocities, without a shred of proof and having done nothing about it at the time the alleged incidents were supposed to have taken place, makes you a disgusting lump of shit worthy of all the ridicule and scorn that can be heaped upon you.

 

Talk about revisionist history!! Bendell, who supposedly wrote the letter refered to ablove, has distorted the truth, misquoted Kerry and has attempted rewrite history.

I just found the transcript of Kerry's "Winter Soildier" testimony before Congress in 1971. He stated in pertinent part:

"I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit - the emotions in the room and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do. "

"They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country. "

Here's the linky: http://www.usnewslink.com/johnkerryvietnam.htm

So, the proof was in the testimony of the 150 honorably discharged vets interviewed by the Winter Soldier project. Does anyone have anything that would controvert Kerry's impression of what those 150 interviews revealed?

MTK, so if you feel that badly about Kerry (without any apparent factual basis), you must REALLY hate Nixon and Kissenger!

IYC, agreed - but watch for the falsified smears to come along, just as Bendell has done, and what may have been done to Bush about his being "AWOL"

 

If the testimony about the atrocities had come from the 150 soldiers mentioned it would hold more weight, the actual facts presented would be referred to as hearsay in a court of law. We are asked to accept John Kerry's version of someone else's experience.

There is also a very basic difference between the Bush and Kerry issues. The points concerning Kerry revolve around actual reported actions and statements.
The allegations concerning Bush are not that he did something wrong, but that he can't provide evidence of something he did.
I've never seen any evidence presented to prove that he didn't do his service, so why is the issue even an issue? It seems to be just a baseless allegation intended to smear, and one that has gone on and on with no proof to lend it legitimacy.
Most of us would be hard-pressed to provide rock-solid proof that we did something 40 years ago.

 

Da-yum!

You tryin' to kill this thread by makin' sense?

Get outta here!

 

If being a Vietnam vet gives Kerry the right to protest the war (which right he certainly has, but I disagree that he has more right than someone else) then certainly his fellow veterans have earned the right to protest the actions and proclamations of John Kerry.

Kerry's actions in his later political career in which he used his political power and position to work against the objectives of veterans and families of veterans on the POW-MIA issues are not part of his war-protesting and are valid issues to consider in the campaign. His actions are well-documented and don't fall into the category of opinions.

 

Some more commentary on Kerry by a writer for the Boston Herald who's been a fan for years.

 

Interesting if true.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...07.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/03/07/ixnewstop.html