2
   

Unfit for Command

 
 
JustanObserver
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:07 pm
McGentrix wrote:
The medals he rejected and symbolically threw away? The same heroics that he decried in the time following his return from the war?

I would not begrudge Kerry his service. He served valiantly and he should be proud of his service. But, what has he done to prove himself in the 30 years since?


Your a trip, man. He didn't decry "Heroics". He decried some of the terrible things that soldiers did during the war. War is hell. People did some bad things, and that's what he was talking about.

As for your second comment, its such a tired technique. We're not talking about what he did "in the 30 years since". We're talking about 'Nam, so I was addressing that point. The way the right runs from the Vietnam conversation when they relize it cant be won (after they themselves bring it up) with that "30 years since" comment, is hilarious.

But please, don't let me stop you from going off in another direction.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:09 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
How about showing me where I posted any of this as 'truth' other than the fact that its out there and my opinion that, if true, the story will have legs?


"What agenda would Kerry's crewmates--those who were there on the boat with him--have other than telling the truth?"

This is a statement of fact -- that his crewmates are the ones now saying that Kerry is not fit for the presidency and that he was "fabricating his Vietnam experience." This is false.

"So what is it about him that makes you so sure he is telling the truth about the other especially when all but one or two who were on the boat with him say he's making it up?"

This is a statement of fact -- that all but one or two of Kerry's crewmates say that he is lying. This is false.

Foxfyre wrote:
Are you suggesting that nothing in the news should be posted on A2K unless it is verified beyond question that it is the truth? Would you want to put all your posts to that test?

Oh boo hoo, Foxfyre. You make these kinds of unqualified statements and then, when someone challenges you, you start crying that you were only stating "opinions." Well opinions can be just as false as statements of fact, and, in this case, they are demonstrably false.

Go cry on someone else's shoulder.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:10 pm
Yeah, I know, who would want a president that's actually done something in the last 30 years, right?

We should just keep talking about Kerry's 4 months in Vietnam. are you keeping up with this thread/ Did you read where his compatriots feel that based on his service in Vietnam he is unfit for command?
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:13 pm
McG - what president are you proposing to have? Someone who's accomplished something in the last 30 years? Kerry's out - Bush is out - what other choice do you have?
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:16 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Did you read where his compatriots feel that based on his service in Vietnam he is unfit for command?

Keep it up, McG. If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:18 pm
Yeah, Joe. But the truth also remains the truth whether anyone likes it or not.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:19 pm
I'm definitely gonna quote McG on that one.
0 Replies
 
swolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:22 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Did you read where his compatriots feel that based on his service in Vietnam he is unfit for command?

Keep it up, McG. If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.


Your own posts indicate that you don't even give a **** about truth vs falsehood, Joe. If a statement supports the demmunist cause and party, it's good, otherwise it's bad, and the question of truth or falsehood is pretty much irrelevant. How else would anybody interpret your statements on the subject of Jim McDougal?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:23 pm
Quote:
"My name is Steve Gardner. I served in 1966 and 1967 on my first tour of duty in Vietnam on Swift boats, and I did my second tour in '68 and '69, involved with John Kerry in the last 2 1/2 months of my tour. The John Kerry that I know is not the John Kerry that everybody else is portraying. I served alongside him and behind him, five feet away from him in a gun tub, and watched as he made indecisive moves with our boat, put our boats in jeopardy, put our crews in jeopardy... if a man like that can't handle that 6-man crew boat, how can you expect him to be our Commander-in-Chief?"

-- Steven Gardner


Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:30 pm
Joe writes:
Quote:
Oh boo hoo, Foxfyre. You make these kinds of unqualified statements and then, when someone challenges you, you start crying that you were only stating "opinions." Well opinions can be just as false as statements of fact, and, in this case, they are demonstrably false


I was pretty explicit that they were my opinions and that I did not know whether they were true or not--if you'll recall that was what you gigged me on; i.e. posting information that I didn't know whether it was true or not. I presume however, that the answer to my question to you is no.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:46 pm
I hate to break this to you, but "Swift Boat Veterans For 'Truth'" has already been outed as a front for the RNC:

http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Swift_Boat_Veterans_for_Truth

Quote:
"When the 'Swift Boat Veterans for Truth' launched its campaign against John Kerry 10 days ago, leadership and guidance were provided by Republican activists and presidential friends from Texas -- notably Houston attorney John E. O'Neill and corporate media consultant Merrie Spaeth.

"On closer inspection, the ostensibly nonpartisan 'Swift Boat Vets' seem to have another pair of significant sponsors with deep and long-standing Republican connections in Missouri. Both are officers of Gannon International, a St. Louis conglomerate that does lots of overseas business in, of all places, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

"Ties to Gannon can be traced via the Swift Boat Vets Web site ... On April 14, the site was registered under the name of Lewis Waterman, Gannon's information technology manager, at 11301 Olive Boulevard in St. Louis, the firm's headquarters address. Although Waterman wouldn't discuss why he had set up the Web site, he didn't deny that his boss, Gannon president and CEO William Franke, had asked him to do so.

"'The information about my client is confidential,' said Waterman. He acknowledged knowing, however, that his boss Franke is a Navy veteran who served in Vietnam on swift boats. Gannon vice president Stephen D. Hayes, who oversees the company's office in Alexandria, Va., is likewise a swift boat veteran who first met Franke when they served together in the Mekong Delta."

"What is most intriguing about Franke, Hayes, and Gannon -- especially in light of their apparent role in the campaign against John Kerry -- are their strong commercial interests in Southeast Asia. While Gannon is a highly diversified holding company whose divisions range from real estate in Florida and Missouri to Internet technology and software, it maintains an unusual presence in Vietnam, with offices in both Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City. Indeed, Gannon has operated in that country's tourism, real estate and import-export sectors for a decade. (The target market for its tours was fellow Vietnam veterans.)

"None of Gannon's profitable activities in the communist republic would be possible, of course, without the approval of the Hanoi government, which Franke has described as 'strong' and 'stable.' Nor would Gannon be conducting business in Vietnam without the Clinton administration diplomacy, assisted by Sen. Kerry, that established diplomatic and trade ties with the United States in 1994. Franke first began traveling to Vietnam on behalf of Operation Smile, an American charity that provides plastic surgery to children abroad. The relationships he established during those humanitarian missions provided a considerable advantage in doing business under government auspices.


Sorry.

Nice try, though.

Tell me again how many of Bush's Purple Hearts were from wounds inflicted by the enemy?

How many Bronze Stars and Slver Stars did Prezdint BringItOn collect on his tour of duty?

See, the thing is, medal verification records, especially those associated with valor, with gallantry, with bravery in a war theatre are meticulously researched and documented.

Can you find anything that indicates that the Pentagon officials who awarded Kerry those medals in his four months of service in Nam in the '60s did so out of politically nefarious intent (to Bush)?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

I hope this also speaks to Foxfyre's pyschological quandary associated with motivation.

If you're still confused about that, just ask and I'll help...
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:49 pm
McGentrix wrote:
"My name is Steve Gardner. I served in 1966 and 1967 on my first tour of duty in Vietnam on Swift boats, and I did my second tour in '68 and '69, involved with John Kerry in the last 2 1/2 months of my tour. The John Kerry that I know is not the John Kerry that everybody else is portraying. I served alongside him and behind him, five feet away from him in a gun tub, and watched as he made indecisive moves with our boat, put our boats in jeopardy, put our crews in jeopardy... if a man like that can't handle that 6-man crew boat, how can you expect him to be our Commander-in-Chief?"

-- Steven Gardner

Well, Steve Gardner may or may not have something personal against Kerry (see this article from the Boston Globe), but it's clear that he doesn't think very much of Kerry's war service.

That's one.

But you said "compatriots," McG: so where are the others?
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:52 pm
swolf wrote:
Your own posts indicate that you don't even give a **** about truth vs falsehood, Joe. If a statement supports the demmunist cause and party, it's good, otherwise it's bad, and the question of truth or falsehood is pretty much irrelevant. How else would anybody interpret your statements on the subject of Jim McDougal?

Why, whatever are you refering to, swolf? I don't think I have ever opined on the subject of Jim McDougal.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:52 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Quote:
"My name is Steve Gardner. [..]


Swift Boat Veterans for Truth

Yeah, and there's also a bunch of men who were with Kerry on the swift boat and are now out there campaigning for him, testifying to all who want to hear how good a man he'd been, out there. So? Why are we supposed to believe your guy over them?

All it shows to me is that Viet vets can be as partisan as the rest of the country. But even if it turns out that he made some mistakes out there (going on your guy) and that he made some heroic actions there (going on the other guys), the balance is still one of a man who went out to Vietnam and fought, while people like Bush Jr and most of the other pols of his generation were at home hiding from the war.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 01:55 pm
ROFL!!!! Disinfopedia, while an ok source, is hardly reliable as it depends on information from unconfirmed sources. It's like suggesting that Moveon.org is nothing more than a front for the Kerry campaign!

Swift Boats for Truth FAQ

Quote:
3. Aren't you nothing more than Republican loyalists who happen to be veterans?

No. Among us are Democrats, Republicans and Independents. We are acting solely as Vietnam veterans who served in Swift Boats.


Quote:
5. How can I join Swift Boat Veterans for Truth?

The organization consists of, and is limited to, former military officers and enlisted men who served in Vietnam on U.S. Navy Swift Boats or in affiliated commands. Veterans can e-mail [email protected] for more information on joining or adding their names to the list of signatures to a letter to Senator Kerry demanding full disclosure of his military records.


Quote:
16. Are you working or involved in any way with the Bush/Cheney campaign or any other Republican organization?

Absolutely not. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is a non-partisan organization. As part of our mission, we believe it is incumbent on ALL presidential candidates to be totally honest and forthcoming regarding personal background and policy information that would help the voting public make an informed decision when choosing the next president of the United States.

The organization was created, organized and funded by swift boat veterans who joined together to defend a common cause. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth accepts donations from individuals and groups as a 527 organization.


I guess you can believe what you want, whether it's the truth or not doesn't seem to matter to you much though.
0 Replies
 
Sagamore
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 02:00 pm
Wow! This does present a dilemma.

Who should I believe?

On the one hand, we have all the guys who actually were on the same boat with Kerry, each of whom credits Kerry with saving his life. One of this group gave a major speech at the convention telling of Kerry's bravery and leadership. All the remaining living crew mates of Kerry's showed up in support of his candidacy.

Or, a group of guys, lead by John O'Neill, who never served with Kerry, who had some kind of epiphany 35 years later and decided to trash him.

One of these groups has more credibility than the other and even a righty should be able to figure out who's who.

The right wing is so desperate for an issue that they have begun to just make stuff up. If they only put the same energy into a dispassionate examination of the Bush record, Kerry would win by a landslide.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 02:02 pm
All the men on Kerry's boat credit him with saving their lives? Do you know where that might be verified Sagamore?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 02:03 pm
Sagamore wrote:
Wow! This does present a dilemma.

Who should I believe?

On the one hand, we have all the guys who actually were on the same boat with Kerry, each of whom credits Kerry with saving his life. One of this group gave a major speech at the convention telling of Kerry's bravery and leadership. All the remaining living crew mates of Kerry's showed up in support of his candidacy.

Or, a group of guys, lead by John O'Neill, who never served with Kerry, who had some kind of epiphany 35 years later and decided to trash him.

One of these groups has more credibility than the other and even a righty should be able to figure out who's who.

The right wing is so desperate for an issue that they have begun to just make stuff up. If they only put the same energy into a dispassionate examination of the Bush record, Kerry would win by a landslide.


Sagamore, go through the list again of who the members of SBfJ are. They are not just a random compilation of people that don't like Kerry.

It matters little though, the division of party lines will never allow the left to consider a different position. Just like the feeling of regret that is worming its way through the democratic heart about who they gave their nomination to.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 02:07 pm
Debunked.

Tools. Every last one of them, right down to our lovely little member here, who has spent all day on this forum finding and posting everything he can find to try to slime John Kerry.

IT AIN'T WORKING.

McG, you're going to leave work today not having given your employer a honest hour's worth of work, and you're going to be madder than you were before you logged in this morning, because the work you did do has been, to quote a certain Democrat, a miserable failure.

Have a nice weekend. Cool
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 02:08 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
What agenda would Kerry's crewmates--those who were there on the boat with him--have other than telling the truth?

Though it wasn't all that big a deal, it has already been proved that Kerry lied about the ribbon/medal throwing episode. It was no big deal other than it showed he will lie for political expediency.

So what is it about him that makes you so sure he is telling the truth about the other especially when all but one or two who were on the boat with him say he's making it up?


Who knows what agenda people have in the back of their minds? That is why we really shouldn't rely on johnny come latelys claiming that kerry really didn't do this or that or that he did this or that but rely on what the records show. He didn't get all those medals for nothing.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Unfit for Command
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 11:38:33