Kerry's Interminable Four Months (Combat Tour My ...)

Re: BBB

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

John Kerry actually volunteered for TWO tours of duty during the Vietnam war---not just four months as some A2Kers are claiming.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200312/brinkley

BBB

No, BBB, let us be specific. According to the article you referenced, Kerry was assigned to the Gridley (he did not volunteer for the Gridley). The Gridley was stationed in the Pacific, and again according to your article, after 5 months in the Pacific "with a brief stop in Vietnam", he returned to the States for his Swift Boat training.

The above is not the same as volunteering for two tours of duty in Nam. This DOES NOT denigrate his service in our armed forces, nor does this indicate anything negative or positive about his service. I just like it when people get their facts right and I think you may have misspoken based on the link you provided to back up your statement.

0 Replies

So, Coastal Rat - how did Kerry come to be in a position to be assigned to anything?

0 Replies

Because these guys have been gunning for Kerry for decades.

They say they will not stop no matter what Bush says.

And the continued laboring over Vietnam helps Kerry hide from his record--the thing the Bushies are desperate to discuss.

There are over 200 who served with and laterally to Kerry who say he is unfit, and lying.

And, this has gotten so unweildy, there are pictures of Kerry's boatmates, which show the overwhelming majority against him, with related anti-Kerry comments. It has gotten so that you or I can find statistics and commentary to support our opinions.

In this case, I make my judgement on the overview.

This is identical to the 527s that are benefitting Kerry. I don't think Kerry has worked with them--but they are working FOR him. The SBVTs aren't working WITH Bush, but AGAINST Kerry, which benefits Bush.

Just as you can't prove Kerry isn't organizing with MoveOn, I can't prove Bush isn't connected with SBVTs-- But we can make reasonable assumptions, based on the SBVT's prior behavior, response to Bush's 527 admonition et al.

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

By the same guys who are continuing to question it now--swiftvets.

It matters, because Jon Stewart lied about it, and plenty of people, who think they are getting 'news' from him, buy it.

you assume, wrongly i think, that stewart lied. is it not possible that he umm, didn't know? would you know about this hatfields and the mccoys drama **** if the swiftboat veterans for bitterness hadn't started yelling it from the rooftop?

and by the way, if you READ the transcript of the '71 cavatt debate between kerry and saint o'neill, you will notice that o'neill NEVER questioned anything about kerry's citations. his gripe was that kerry got involved with the antiwar movement when he got back.

this medal business is plain old "plan b" bullshit.

and if you want to talk about people getting "real news", i personally saw that truth happy knower of all things morally courageous, sean hannity introduce o'neill and his svfb act several weeks before the convention. hawking a book that wasn't finished.

0 Replies

Coastal Rat
Coastal Rat, here's another article re Kerry's two tours of duty:

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061603.shtml

BBB

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

So, Coastal Rat - how did Kerry come to be in a position to be assigned to anything?

Please don't get me wrong, ehBeth. I am not saying he did not volunteer for the service. I applaud him and all vets of any branch of military service for volunteering. I believe he served to the best of his ability, and I think that while the Swift Boat Vets may have truth behind some of what they claim (the Cambodian episode being the main cloud casting doubt on Kerry's overall truthfulness), I do not doubt that Kerry served admirably. Were his wounds worthy of the 3 purple hearts he recieved? I don't know and am not qualified to say. He has them, so I guess someone thought he earned them. Unless hard evidence says otherwise, that is good enough for me.

Has he lied about Cambodia? Yep, no doubt in my mind. Did he make enemies of many other vets by what he did after the war? Yep, no doubt there either. Each voter must weigh all this in deciding for themselves how much this should effect his presidential qualifications.

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

By the same guys who are continuing to question it now--swiftvets.

wrong. svfb was only formed this year. o'neill was recruited in 1971 by coulson to do nixon's dirty work.

0 Replies

Were there troops in Cambodia when Americans were being told there were not? I've never seen that answered definitively, and that makes a big difference to me re: truthfulness.

Kerry was definitely (records show) within 2 hours of Cambodia. Last I knew, nothing had proven he WASN'T in fact in Cambodia. We don't KNOW that he lied about that.

But most importantly to me, he made that point in terms of covert operations, South America, and the fact that he saw his president lie when he knew that there were in fact troops in Cambodia.

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

Some swiftvets. Which ones, and why and when.

This has been hashed to death - some people are going to see malice aforethought, and the fingerprints of Richard Nixon and other Republicans all over it - they are going to spot the interesting timing of the resurgence of some swiftvet activity - others will not see it.

not to nit pick, but you forgot mellon-scaife.
Laughing

0 Replies

Re: Coastal Rat

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

Coastal Rat, here's another article re Kerry's two tours of duty:

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061603.shtml

BBB

And I would reject that article out of hand because it opens with a premise that even Kerry's campaign acknowledges is false. He never was in Cambodia at Christmas time in 1968.

If you are trying to prove he volunteered for 2 tours of duty, I think you will have a hard time. He volunteered for military service, was assigned to the USS Gridley, then volunteered for Swift Boat duty and was sent to Nam after his training. None of that is a smear on Kerry. It is simply the facts.

0 Replies

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

Sofia wrote:
By the same guys who are continuing to question it now--swiftvets.

wrong. svfb was only formed this year. o'neill was recruited in 1971 by coulson to do nixon's dirty work.

Many of the people who COMPRISE swiftvets were speaking out against Kerry. If O'Neill was recruited, it was after they heard of him already questioning Kerry publicly.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Were there troops in Cambodia when Americans were being told there were not? I've never seen that answered definitively, and that makes a big difference to me re: truthfulness.

Kerry was definitely (records show) within 2 hours of Cambodia. Last I knew, nothing had proven he WASN'T in fact in Cambodia. We don't KNOW that he lied about that.

But most importantly to me, he made that point in terms of covert operations, South America, and the fact that he saw his president lie when he knew that there were in fact troops in Cambodia.

Look, you can sugar coat it all you want, but Kerry lied about Cambodia. Being within 2 hours of the place does not mean he went there. I will have to look up quotes to prove that even his supporters say he was mistaken about that but will do so as time permits.

Again, each person must decide if it is a big deal or not. I am not here trying to bash him or his service, I only posted to correct a statement that was so obviously in error based on a link the poster provided.

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
Sofia wrote:
By the same guys who are continuing to question it now--swiftvets.

wrong. svfb was only formed this year. o'neill was recruited in 1971 by coulson to do nixon's dirty work.

Many of the people who COMPRISE swiftvets were speaking out against Kerry. If O'Neill was recruited, it was after they heard of him already questioning Kerry publicly.

Which ones? And didn't at least one of them defend Kerry in a '96 senate campaign?

What strikes me from the Hardball interview of Thurlow (the guy who got a medal at the same time as him for one of these disputed actions) is that it sounded like somebody had almost indoctrinated him. I think there are very few specific allegations, and those specific allegations should have been taken up with the Navy. That's just not enough for me. I'm willing to say that different people remember things differently and leave it at that.

0 Replies

Sozobe, here is a quote and the link to back up my statement that even the Kerry campaign says he was "mistaken" about being in Cambodia on Christmas, 1968. I guess when Kerry lies, he is only mistaken as opposed to when Bush is wrong, he is lying. Such is the way of rival political parties. Smile

"On Wednesday, the Kerry campaign acknowledged that John Kerry probably was not in Cambodia on Christmas 1968, contrary to the senator's decades-old assertion. Speaking on Fox News' "Fox and Friends," Kerry campaign aide Jeh Johnson said, "John Kerry has said on the record that he had a mistaken recollection earlier. He talked about a combat situation on Christmas Eve 1968 which at one point he said occurred in Cambodia. He has since corrected the record to say it was some place on a river near Cambodia and he is certain that at some point subsequent to that he was in Cambodia. My understanding is that he is not certain about that date." Recall that this is the date that Mr. Kerry, speaking on the Senate floor in 1986, said was "seared" into him."

The link http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040812-090512-6687r.htm

0 Replies

Do you wonder why Kerry doesn't just ....move on?
Bush has said he hates the 527s, and that Kerry's service was noble... Why do they keep harping on it?

Why doesn't Kerry take on the swiftvets? They are the ones saying it?

Makes one wonder.

0 Replies

Kerry didn't lie about Cambodia. If anything, if what he is said was incorrect, he was mistaken. Any rational person can figure that out. He had no reason to lie about it. There is no possible motivation to do so and it goes against the grain of what the man is all about. I love how the right who regurgitate deceit every hour of the day are so quick to call someone who may have misspoke a liar.

0 Replies

It's called 'not sinking to your opponents' level.'

The fact that many of these same Swiftvets are quoted as supporting Kerry and saying good things about him just a few years ago... makes one wonder if they are politically motivated. Hmm? Do you even consider that to be a possibility, Sofia?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
Sofia wrote:
By the same guys who are continuing to question it now--swiftvets.

wrong. svfb was only formed this year. o'neill was recruited in 1971 by coulson to do nixon's dirty work.

Many of the people who COMPRISE swiftvets were speaking out against Kerry. If O'Neill was recruited, it was after they heard of him already questioning Kerry publicly.

Huh? O'Neil has been trying to avenge Kerry since Kerry handed him his head on the Dick Cavett Show in 1971. You seem to be saying this bitter old man just popped up from nowhere.

0 Replies

Harper wrote:

Kerry didn't lie about Cambodia. If anything, if what he is said was incorrect, he was mistaken. Any rational person can figure that out. He had no reason to lie about it. There is no possible motivation to do so and it goes against the grain of what the man is all about. I love how the right who regurgitate deceit every hour of the day are so quick to call someone who may have misspoke a liar.

Wow. just...wow. Let me demonstrate the "wowness" of this post.

Bush didn't lie about WMD's. If anything, if what he is said was incorrect, he was mistaken. Any rational person can figure that out. He had no reason to lie about it. There is no possible motivation to do so and it goes against the grain of what the man is all about. I love how the left who regurgitate deceit every hour of the day are so quick to call someone who may have misspoke a liar.

0 Replies

Almost, McG, except for this part:

Quote:

He had no reason to lie about it. There is no possible motivation to do so and it goes against the grain of what the man is all about.

There is motivation and it is exactly what the man is all about -- in this context.

0 Replies

Kerry's Interminable Four Months (Combat Tour My ...)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know