1
   

"Unfit for Command"

 
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2004 11:10 am
That all you got for proof?

DEEEEEEEEEBunked, then. Cool
0 Replies
 
Karzak
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2004 12:15 pm
PDiddie wrote:
That all you got for proof?

DEEEEEEEEEBunked, then. Cool


LOL, what is the point of offering you proof, you will just claim it is some right wing conspiracy.

Most of saddams direct reports had only positive things to say about saddam.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2004 12:27 pm
And I'm sure Kerry threatened his crewmembers with prison and torture if they didn't say something positive. Lousy analogy.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2004 12:35 pm
I doubt Kerry threatened anybody with torture. I do think the request of a former boatmate who is now a sitting senator and candidate for President of the United States would be especially compelling and would also discourage most people from saying anything negative about such a person.
0 Replies
 
Karzak
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2004 12:44 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
I doubt Kerry threatened anybody with torture. I do think the request of a former boatmate who is now a sitting senator and candidate for President of the United States would be especially compelling and would also discourage most people from saying anything negative about such a person.


Don't try reason with a liberal, it won't work. You distract them and I'll change the name from Kerry to Bush, then they will all be screaming for impeachment!
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 10:21 am
Foxfyre:

Karzak: Most of saddams direct reports had only positive things to say about saddam.

To which I answered:

And I'm sure Kerry threatened his crewmembers with prison and torture if they didn't say something positive. Lousy analogy.


What in the world are you talking about?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 10:25 am
LW, I didn't bring up Saddam in this thread and I didn't say that Kerry used torture or threats of torture to elicit favorable comments from his former boatmate. What are YOU talking about?
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 10:40 am
You're still not reading that I was commenting on Karsak's comment, not on anything you posted.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 10:40 am
Karzak wrote:
PDiddie wrote:
That all you got for proof?

DEEEEEEEEEBunked, then. Cool


LOL, what is the point of offering you proof, you will just claim it is some right wing conspiracy.

Most of saddams direct reports had only positive things to say about saddam.[/[/b]quote]
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 11:04 am
Okay the way I understood how this went (where is McG when you need him?):

1. It was said that Kerry's boatmates approved of Kerry.

2. It was said the Saddam's mates approved of Saddam.

3. It was said that Kerry didn't use torture to elicit approving comments.

4. It was said that the request of a sitting Senator for a 'letter of recommendation' or something to that effect would be difficult to resist.

The analogy: one uses threat of torture to get letters of recommendation; one uses the heady allure of a moment of fame to get letters of recommendation and how it would be difficult to turn down the request of a sitting U.S. Senator.

It isn't comparing apples and oranges; it is merely a metaphorical comparison of different kinds of coercion.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 11:10 am
Poor metaphor.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 03:16 pm
The crew that was with him said there was no enemy fire and that the wound was self inflicted.

You should be careful with statements like that, people read what you say.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Aug, 2004 07:35 pm
I don't do weekends. Laughing
0 Replies
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 07:58 am
Medical report stated…"Shrapnel in left arm above elbow," the report says, with military abbreviation. "Shrapnel removed and applied bacitracin dressing. Ret to Duty."

"What's the difference between a small piece of shrapnel and losing an arm or leg?" Thorne said about the skepticism. "It's all second-guessing at this point. Everyone put their life on the line, and everyone said, `There [but] for the grace of God go I.' It's a specious argument [to say it was a minor injury], and it makes veterans go so crazy."

In an interview, Brinkley said Kerry "was not medal-hunting." In Vietnam, the historian said, there was "historical medal inflation," to keep soldiers engaged in the war. "That was not John Kerry's fault," he said.

"The fact is, John Kerry was exceedingly lucky in Vietnam that his three wounds were minor," he said.

In March 1969, Kerry was wounded again, this time taking shrapnel in the buttocks and right forearm when a mine exploded near his boat. Under fire from the riverbank, Kerry gave orders to get out of the area. But in the getaway, Kerry realized that he had lost a man overboard -- Rassman, whom Kerry had been transporting out of the area. He ordered the boat back.

"Lt. Kerry directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire," says the citation for Kerry's Bronze Star, which he earned on this mission, along with his third Purple Heart, "while from an exposed position on the bow, his arm bleeding and in pain, with disregard for his personal safety, he pulled the man aboard."

Rassman nominated Kerry for the Silver Star -- and to this day, he is perplexed that it was downgraded to the Bronze. "I figure I was dead because so many people were shooting at me," Rassman said. "He came right up to the bow of the boat and pulled me in. That was stupid."
http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040808/NEWS/408080419/1039
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 10:28 am
Karzak wrote:
"George Bates, an officer in Coastal Division 11, participated in numerous operations with Kerry. In UNFIT FOR COMMAND, Bates recalls a particular patrol with Kerry on the Song Bo De River. He is still "haunted" by the incident:

"Upon [Kerry's] command, the numerous small animals were slaughtered by heavy-caliber machine guns. Acting more like a pirate than a naval officer, Kerry disembarked and ran around with a Zippo lighter, burning up the entire hamlet."

What, you mean Kerry was NOT lying when he testified in DC about having witnessed "atrocities"?

Hehheh ...
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 10:33 am
In the other thread about "Unfit for Command", which I much prefer because I dropped a shitload of info and data into it last week, I just added some quotes from USA Today. They included these bits of fact-checking:

Quote:
Among those criticizing Kerry: [..]

• Adrian Lonsdale, who in 1996 called Kerry "among the finest of those swift boat drivers." He says he changed his mind after reading Brinkley's book. Lonsdale, who outranked Kerry, recalls meeting him only once at an officers club. "The only thing I remember is he whined a lot about the lack of air support," he said.

• Charles Plumly, a retired Navy captain who was Hoffmann's chief of staff. He says Kerry "required a lot of supervision" and "did things without permission." Asked in an interview for examples, he said, "I can't give you exact specifics." [..]

• Louis Letson, a doctor who says he treated Kerry. He says Kerry didn't deserve his first Purple Heart because he "inadvertently wounded himself" and "there was no hostile fire." Medical records, however, note that Kerry was treated for shrapnel by J.C. Carreon, not Letson. Bill Zaladonis, who was on Kerry's boat at the time, says the men believed they were shooting at Viet Cong.

FactCheck.org, a non-partisan group that monitors political ads, says Letson's story is "based on hearsay, and disputed hearsay at that." [..]

Some stuff here just doesnt add up ...
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 10:40 am
Like in "1984," you're asked to believe that 2 and 2 is 5.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 10:54 am
But I'm reading that all of this could be put to rest if Kerry would sign the Form 180 that would release all his military record including his military medical record. This he refuses to do.

It just gets curiouser and curiouser.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Aug, 2004 04:08 pm
Kerry's either a war criminal by his own admission or he lied to congress, either way I'm not inclined to vote for him on that basis.

Either he or the Swift Vets are lying, they are standing by their words with affidavits still the truth may be somewhere in between.

The bottom line is it's up to Kerry to clear this up even if he has to debate the Swift Vets which have stated they are more than willing to do.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Aug, 2004 04:25 pm
The most ironic thing about all this--or would it actually be typical--is just a few weeks ago, conservatives were complaining loud and long about all the proved fallacies, misrepresentations, and flat out lies in Michael Moore's so-called documentary. And the response from the left was that Moore had a right to his opinion and at the very least the documentary raised issues for the purpose of consideration and discussion. It was SHAMEFUL SHAMEFUL SHAMEFUL and OUTRAGEOUS that anyone would presume to tell a movie theater not to show the movie during a presidential campaign; that was infringement of free speech yadda yadda.

Now we have the DNC and Kerry's lawyers doing their damndest to keep television stations from showing the Swiftboat ad negative of Kerry and booksellers being approached not to stock the book.

Isn't that just amazing?
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
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/09/2024 at 04:41:20