Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572
'It Didn't Happen'



We suppose it was inevitable: Four and a half years after Congress authorized the liberation of Iraq, some observers are comparing the situation there to Vietnam, where America lost a war after its will faltered. It turns out at least one congressman actually served in Vietnam, so he ought to be particularly qualified to help us determine the lessons of that conflict for this one.

Meet John Kerry, junior senator from Massachusetts. Some say he looks French, others call him haughty. But everyone agrees on one thing: He served in Vietnam.

After returning from a tour of duty that lasted an astonishing four months, Kerry also became an antiwar activist. In 1971 Kerry testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the Vietnamese were a simple people, too simple to care about freedom or oppression:

    We found most people didn't even know the difference between communism and democracy. They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart.

Kerry's side prevailed. In 1973 the U.S. withdrew its troops from Vietnam, and in 1975 Congress, its Democratic majority expanded by the post-Watergate election of 1974, voted to cut off aid to the South Vietnamese government. That year Saigon fell to the communists.

What happened then? Not much, according to Kerry, quoted in the Chicago Tribune:

    "We heard that argument over and over again about the bloodbath that would engulf the entire Southeast Asia, and it didn't happen," Kerry said, dismissing the charge out of hand as he argued that the American presence only makes the situation worse every day.

In 2001, California's Orange County Register published an investigation of communist re-education camps in postwar Vietnam:

    To corroborate the experiences of refugees now living in Orange County, the Register interviewed dozens of former inmates and their families, both in the United States and Vietnam; analyzed hundreds of pages of documents, including testimony from more than 800 individuals sent to jail; and interviewed Southeast Asian scholars. The review found:

        * An estimated 1 million people were imprisoned without formal charges or trials.

        * 165,000 people died in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam's re-education camps, according to published academic studies in the United States and Europe.

        * Thousands were abused or tortured: their hands and legs shackled in painful positions for months, their skin slashed by bamboo canes studded with thorns, their veins injected with poisonous chemicals, their spirits broken with stories about relatives being killed.

        * Prisoners were incarcerated for as long as 17 years, according to the U.S. Department of State, with most terms ranging from three to 10 years.

        * At least 150 re-education prisons were built after Saigon fell 26 years ago.

        * One in three South Vietnamese families had a relative in a re-education camp.

According to John Kerry, "it didn't happen."

Things were even worse in Cambodia, as the Christian Science Monitor reported in 2005:

    When the Khmer Rouge victoriously entered Phnom Penh 30 years ago, many people greeted the rebels with a cautious optimism, weary from five years of civil war that had torn apart their lives and killed hundreds of thousands of Cambodians. . . .

    During the nearly four years following that day--April 17, 1975--Cambodia was radically transformed. . . .

    Everyday freedoms were abolished. Buddhism and other forms of religious worship were banned. Money, markets, and media disappeared. Travel, public gatherings, and communication were restricted. Contact with the outside world vanished. And the state set out to control what people ate and did each day, whom they married, how they spoke, what they thought, and who would live and die. "To keep you is no gain," the Khmer Rouge warned, "To destroy you is no loss."

    In the end, more than 1.7 million of Cambodia's 8 million inhabitants perished from disease, starvation, overwork, or outright execution in a notorious genocide.

But don't worry. According to John Kerry, "it didn't happen."

Last week, as we noted, Kerry's colleague Barack Obama opined that genocide in Iraq would be preferable to America's continued presence there. But John Kerry has shown the way. If genocide, or some lesser horror, does occur in the wake of a U.S. retreat, Obama can simply assert: "It didn't happen."

Prominent Democratic officeholders are willing to deny or countenance crimes against humanity in order to justify a popular political position. Doesn't this shock the conscience of Democrats?


http://opinionjournal.com/best/

Last edited by Comrade Ogilvy (2007-07-23 14:23:36)

r2zoo
Knowledge is power, guard it well
+126|7038|Michigan, USA
Guess ill be the first to say that some in this forum wont agree with an editorial article, considering it is an opinion piece, although it may be based on fact.  Never liked kerry though, never saw what others saw in him, this furthers my dislike of him.

Last edited by r2zoo (2007-07-23 14:26:25)

usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7204

"After returning from a tour of duty that lasted an astonishing four months"

I didn't know that.  Why was it only four months?
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,992|7074|949

Prominent Republican officeholders do the same thing.  Doesn't this shock the conscience of Americans in general?

My guess is no, by your CTRL-C / CTRL-V job here.

I wonder if he made that observation (about S.E. Asia) with knowledge of CIA operations in the area...

I wonder if you actually know what you are talking about...4 month tour eh?  Was that just the first or second tour he did?

I don't particularly like John Kerry at all, but I don't like emotive opinion articles that lack clarity either.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-07-23 14:29:26)

Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572

usmarine2005 wrote:

"After returning from a tour of duty that lasted an astonishing four months"

I didn't know that.  Why was it only four months?
He got 3 "Band-Aid" purple Hearts in four months and was entitled to leave combat...amazing in only 4 months he got all those medals..what a Rambo.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7204

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

"After returning from a tour of duty that lasted an astonishing four months"

I didn't know that.  Why was it only four months?
He got 3 "Band-Aid" purple Hearts in four months and was entitled to leave combat...amazing in only 4 months he got all those medals..what a Rambo.
I need to read up on that.  Sounds fishy.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6997
It's amazing how many supposedly patriotic Americans can lambast someone who did his duty, received three purple hearts AND A BRONZE MEDAL FOR RESCUING A COLLEAGUE.

And you call liberals unpatriotic. Pathetic.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7204

CameronPoe wrote:

It's amazing how many supposedly patriotic Americans can lambast someone who did his duty, received three purple hearts AND A BRONZE MEDAL FOR RESCUING A COLLEAGUE.

And you call liberals unpatriotic. Pathetic.
I said I need to read up on it.  Jeez.

First site I found when entered into yahoo

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/

Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-07-23 14:58:41)

san4
The Mas
+311|7130|NYC, a place to live

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

"After returning from a tour of duty that lasted an astonishing four months"

I didn't know that.  Why was it only four months?
He got 3 "Band-Aid" purple Hearts in four months and was entitled to leave combat...amazing in only 4 months he got all those medals..what a Rambo.
I've always wondered how members of the military react to people dismissing Kerry's purple hearts because the wounds weren't severe. Is it insulting to anyone who got a purple heart for a minor injury? Or does it seem justified to criticize Kerry for getting purple hearts for minor wounds?

My thinking has always been that a purple heart means you were doing your job in a place where there were explosions and chunks of metal flying around (at least that was the case for Kerry). I don't really care how severe the wound is if it resulted from enemy fire, because you were in a situation where a wound could have been a lot worse.
Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572

CameronPoe wrote:

It's amazing how many supposedly patriotic Americans can lambast someone who did his duty, received three purple hearts AND A BRONZE MEDAL FOR RESCUING A COLLEAGUE.

And you call liberals unpatriotic. Pathetic.
Actually its amazing that lefty's like you are so gullible to believe in a man that lost a presidential election because he refused to release all his questionable military records.
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6732|Éire
Point A: 4 months is 4 months longer than your dearly beloved George W. Bush served in Vietnam ...oh I forgot he was protecting Texas in the Texas Air National Guard in case Charlie made it over in their F16's.

Point B: How long did you serve in Vietnam that enables you to speak so flippantly about a four month stint there?
jonsimon
Member
+224|6937

san4 wrote:

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

"After returning from a tour of duty that lasted an astonishing four months"

I didn't know that.  Why was it only four months?
He got 3 "Band-Aid" purple Hearts in four months and was entitled to leave combat...amazing in only 4 months he got all those medals..what a Rambo.
I've always wondered how members of the military react to people dismissing Kerry's purple hearts because the wounds weren't severe. Is it insulting to anyone who got a purple heart for a minor injury? Or does it seem justified to criticize Kerry for getting purple hearts for minor wounds?

My thinking has always been that a purple heart means you were doing your job in a place where there were explosions and chunks of metal flying around (at least that was the case for Kerry). I don't really care how severe the wound is if it resulted from enemy fire, because you were in a situation where a wound could have been a lot worse.
Anyone that criticizes the severity, or lack thereof, of a purple heart wound should voluntarily be shot in the leg to prove how much more manly they are.
Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572
MR. RUSSERT:  See if you could clear up one issue that I think has been left over from the campaign.  And that is Steve Gardner, who was a foregunner on your PCF-44 boat, cut a commercial for the Swift Boat Veterans and made a very specific charge.  Let me just show that and you can come back and talk about it a little bit.

(Videotape, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad):

MR. STEVE GARDNER:  John Kerry claims that he spent Christmas in 1968 in Cambodia, and that is categorically a lie.  Not in December, not in January, we were never in Cambodia on a secret mission ever.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT:  Now, the New York Daily News editorial wrote an editorial, and it said this.  "As for Kerry, he might ask why the Swifties' attacks have been effective.  The answer is his propensity to exaggerate. ... It's looking more likely that he exaggerated, if not worse, when he claimed through the years that he was in Cambodia on Christmas Eve '68.  He said the memory was `seared' into him, but it's now clear Kerry was elsewhere, at least at that time.  He has yet to explain.  Until he does, the Swifties will have a powerful weapon in their arsenal."

And they refer, Senator, to a speech on the floor in which you said that you were there, that the president of the United States was saying you were not there, that there were troops in Cambodia.  You have the memory seared in you. In a letter to the Boston Herald, you remember spending Christmas Eve '68 five miles across the Cambodian border.  You told The Washington Post you have a lucky hat given to you by a CIA guy "as we went in for a special mission to Cambodia."  Were you in Cambodia Christmas Eve, 1968?

SEN. KERRY:  We were right on the border, Tim.  What I explained to people and I told this any number of times, did I go into Cambodia on a mission? Yes, I did go into Cambodia on a mission.  Was it on that night?  No, it was not on that night.  But we were right on the Cambodian border that night.  We were ambushed there, as a matter of fact.  And that is a matter of record, and we went into the rec-- you know, it's part of the Navy records.  It's been documented by the other guys who were on my boat.  And Steve Gardner, frankly, doesn't know where we were.  It wasn't his job, and, you know, he wasn't involved in that.  But we did go five miles into Cambodia.  It was on another day.  I jumbled the two together, but we were five miles into Cambodia.  We went up on a mission with CIA agents--I believe they were CIA agents--CIA Special Ops guys.  I even have some photographs of it, and I can document it. And it has been documented.

MR. RUSSERT:  You'll release those photographs?

SEN. KERRY:  I think they were shown.  I gave them to the campaign, but...

MR. RUSSERT:  And you have a hat that the CIA agent gave you?

SEN. KERRY:  I still have the hat that he gave me, and I hope the guy would come out of the woodwork and say, "I'm the guy who went up with John Kerry. We delivered weapons to the Khmer Rouge on the coastline of Cambodia."  We went out of Ha Tien, which is right in Vietnam.  We went north up into the border.  And I have some photographs of that, and that's what we did.  So, you know, the two were jumbled together, but we were on the Cambodian border on Christmas Eve, absolutely.

MR. RUSSERT:  Nixon was president-elect, not president, at that particular time.  He wasn't sworn in until...

SEN. KERRY:  In 1968, he wasn't sworn in yet.

MR. RUSSERT:  But he was president-elect, not president.

SEN. KERRY:  That's correct.

MR. RUSSERT:  Many people who've been criticizing you have said:  Senator, if you would just do one thing and that is sign Form 180, which would allow historians and journalists complete access to all your military records.  Thus far, you have gotten the records, released them through your campaign.  They say you should not be the filter.  Sign Form 180 and let the historians...

SEN. KERRY:  I'd be happy to put the records out.  We put all the records out that I had been sent by the military.  Then at the last moment, they sent some more stuff, which had some things that weren't even relevant to the record. So when we get--I'm going to sit down with them and make sure that they are clear and I am clear as to what is in the record and what isn't in the record and we'll put it out.  I have no problem with that.

MR. RUSSERT:  Would you sign Form 180?

SEN. KERRY:  But everything, Tim...

MR. RUSSERT:  Would you sign Form 180?

SEN. KERRY:  Yes, I will.  But everything that we put in it, Tim--everything we put in--I mean, everything that was out was a full documentation of all of the medical records, all of the fitness reports.  And I'd call on those who have challenged me, let's see their records.  I want to see the records of each of those people who have put up a challenge, because some of them have some serious questions in them, and it hasn't been appropriate...

MR. RUSSERT:  So they should sign Form 180s for themselves as well?

SEN. KERRY:  You bet.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,992|7074|949

usmarine2005 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

It's amazing how many supposedly patriotic Americans can lambast someone who did his duty, received three purple hearts AND A BRONZE MEDAL FOR RESCUING A COLLEAGUE.

And you call liberals unpatriotic. Pathetic.
I said I need to read up on it.  Jeez.

First site I found when entered into yahoo

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/
"Impeach Hanoi John".  Hahaha, classic.
Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

MR. RUSSERT:  See if you could clear up one issue that I think has been left over from the campaign.  And that is Steve Gardner, who was a foregunner on your PCF-44 boat, cut a commercial for the Swift Boat Veterans and made a very specific charge.  Let me just show that and you can come back and talk about it a little bit.

(Videotape, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad):

MR. STEVE GARDNER:  John Kerry claims that he spent Christmas in 1968 in Cambodia, and that is categorically a lie.  Not in December, not in January, we were never in Cambodia on a secret mission ever.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT:  Now, the New York Daily News editorial wrote an editorial, and it said this.  "As for Kerry, he might ask why the Swifties' attacks have been effective.  The answer is his propensity to exaggerate. ... It's looking more likely that he exaggerated, if not worse, when he claimed through the years that he was in Cambodia on Christmas Eve '68.  He said the memory was `seared' into him, but it's now clear Kerry was elsewhere, at least at that time.  He has yet to explain.  Until he does, the Swifties will have a powerful weapon in their arsenal."

And they refer, Senator, to a speech on the floor in which you said that you were there, that the president of the United States was saying you were not there, that there were troops in Cambodia.  You have the memory seared in you. In a letter to the Boston Herald, you remember spending Christmas Eve '68 five miles across the Cambodian border.  You told The Washington Post you have a lucky hat given to you by a CIA guy "as we went in for a special mission to Cambodia."  Were you in Cambodia Christmas Eve, 1968?

SEN. KERRY:  We were right on the border, Tim.  What I explained to people and I told this any number of times, did I go into Cambodia on a mission? Yes, I did go into Cambodia on a mission.  Was it on that night?  No, it was not on that night.  But we were right on the Cambodian border that night.  We were ambushed there, as a matter of fact.  And that is a matter of record, and we went into the rec-- you know, it's part of the Navy records.  It's been documented by the other guys who were on my boat.  And Steve Gardner, frankly, doesn't know where we were.  It wasn't his job, and, you know, he wasn't involved in that.  But we did go five miles into Cambodia.  It was on another day.  I jumbled the two together, but we were five miles into Cambodia.  We went up on a mission with CIA agents--I believe they were CIA agents--CIA Special Ops guys.  I even have some photographs of it, and I can document it. And it has been documented.

MR. RUSSERT:  You'll release those photographs?

SEN. KERRY:  I think they were shown.  I gave them to the campaign, but...

MR. RUSSERT:  And you have a hat that the CIA agent gave you?

SEN. KERRY:  I still have the hat that he gave me, and I hope the guy would come out of the woodwork and say, "I'm the guy who went up with John Kerry. We delivered weapons to the Khmer Rouge on the coastline of Cambodia."  We went out of Ha Tien, which is right in Vietnam.  We went north up into the border.  And I have some photographs of that, and that's what we did.  So, you know, the two were jumbled together, but we were on the Cambodian border on Christmas Eve, absolutely.

MR. RUSSERT:  Nixon was president-elect, not president, at that particular time.  He wasn't sworn in until...

SEN. KERRY:  In 1968, he wasn't sworn in yet.

MR. RUSSERT:  But he was president-elect, not president.

SEN. KERRY:  That's correct.

MR. RUSSERT:  Many people who've been criticizing you have said:  Senator, if you would just do one thing and that is sign Form 180, which would allow historians and journalists complete access to all your military records.  Thus far, you have gotten the records, released them through your campaign.  They say you should not be the filter.  Sign Form 180 and let the historians...

SEN. KERRY:  I'd be happy to put the records out.  We put all the records out that I had been sent by the military.  Then at the last moment, they sent some more stuff, which had some things that weren't even relevant to the record. So when we get--I'm going to sit down with them and make sure that they are clear and I am clear as to what is in the record and what isn't in the record and we'll put it out.  I have no problem with that.

MR. RUSSERT:  Would you sign Form 180?

SEN. KERRY:  But everything, Tim...

MR. RUSSERT:  Would you sign Form 180?

SEN. KERRY:  Yes, I will.  But everything that we put in it, Tim--everything we put in--I mean, everything that was out was a full documentation of all of the medical records, all of the fitness reports.  And I'd call on those who have challenged me, let's see their records.  I want to see the records of each of those people who have put up a challenge, because some of them have some serious questions in them, and it hasn't been appropriate...

MR. RUSSERT:  So they should sign Form 180s for themselves as well?

SEN. KERRY:  You bet.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6886726/
Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572

Braddock wrote:

Point A: 4 months is 4 months longer than your dearly beloved George W. Bush served in Vietnam ...oh I forgot he was protecting Texas in the Texas Air National Guard in case Charlie made it over in their F16's.

Point B: How long did you serve in Vietnam that enables you to speak so flippantly about a four month stint there?
Bush did his duty...but he didn`t run on being a fake war hero did he.

One year....
Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572

san4 wrote:

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

"After returning from a tour of duty that lasted an astonishing four months"

I didn't know that.  Why was it only four months?
He got 3 "Band-Aid" purple Hearts in four months and was entitled to leave combat...amazing in only 4 months he got all those medals..what a Rambo.
I've always wondered how members of the military react to people dismissing Kerry's purple hearts because the wounds weren't severe. Is it insulting to anyone who got a purple heart for a minor injury? Or does it seem justified to criticize Kerry for getting purple hearts for minor wounds?

My thinking has always been that a purple heart means you were doing your job in a place where there were explosions and chunks of metal flying around (at least that was the case for Kerry). I don't really care how severe the wound is if it resulted from enemy fire, because you were in a situation where a wound could have been a lot worse.
Actually his former commanding officer said some of his wounds were so minor that he didn`t deserve a PH...but Kerry re-routed the request behind his back.
Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572

jonsimon wrote:

san4 wrote:

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:


He got 3 "Band-Aid" purple Hearts in four months and was entitled to leave combat...amazing in only 4 months he got all those medals..what a Rambo.
I've always wondered how members of the military react to people dismissing Kerry's purple hearts because the wounds weren't severe. Is it insulting to anyone who got a purple heart for a minor injury? Or does it seem justified to criticize Kerry for getting purple hearts for minor wounds?

My thinking has always been that a purple heart means you were doing your job in a place where there were explosions and chunks of metal flying around (at least that was the case for Kerry). I don't really care how severe the wound is if it resulted from enemy fire, because you were in a situation where a wound could have been a lot worse.
Anyone that criticizes the severity, or lack thereof, of a purple heart wound should voluntarily be shot in the leg to prove how much more manly they are.
Not all medals in a war are deserved....
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,992|7074|949

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

san4 wrote:

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

He got 3 "Band-Aid" purple Hearts in four months and was entitled to leave combat...amazing in only 4 months he got all those medals..what a Rambo.
I've always wondered how members of the military react to people dismissing Kerry's purple hearts because the wounds weren't severe. Is it insulting to anyone who got a purple heart for a minor injury? Or does it seem justified to criticize Kerry for getting purple hearts for minor wounds?

My thinking has always been that a purple heart means you were doing your job in a place where there were explosions and chunks of metal flying around (at least that was the case for Kerry). I don't really care how severe the wound is if it resulted from enemy fire, because you were in a situation where a wound could have been a lot worse.
Actually his former commanding officer said some of his wounds were so minor that he didn`t deserve a PH...but Kerry re-routed the request behind his back.
Eight days later, on February 28, 1969, came the events for which Kerry was awarded his Silver Star. On this occasion, Kerry was in tactical command of his Swift boat and two others. Their mission included bringing a demolition team and dozens of South Vietnamese soldiers to destroy enemy sampans, structures and bunkers. Running into an ambush, Kerry "directed the boats to turn to the beach and charge the Viet Cong positions" and he "expertly directed" his boat's fire and coordinated the deployment of the South Vietnamese troops, according to the original medal citation (signed by Admiral Zumwalt). Going a short distance farther, Kerry's boat was the target of an RPG round; as the boat beached at the site, a VC with a rocket launcher jumped and ran from a spider hole. While the boat's gunner opened fire, wounding the VC on the leg, and while the other boats approached and offered cover fire, Kerry jumped from the boat and chased the VC and killed him, capturing a loaded rocket launcher.[19][20][21]

Kerry's commanding officer, Lieutenant Commander George Elliott, joked to Douglas Brinkley in 2003 that he didn't know whether to court-martial Kerry for beaching the boat without orders or give him a medal for saving the crew. Elliott recommended Kerry for the Silver Star, and Zumwalt flew into An Thoi to personally award medals to Kerry and the rest of the sailors involved in the mission. The Navy's account of Kerry's actions is presented in the original medal citation signed by Zumwalt. The engagement was documented in an after-action report, a press release written on March 1, 1969, and a historical summary dated March 17, 1969.[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry#Military_honors

Like I said, I don't particularly like John Kerry, but you post unsubstantiated claims.

What is your agenda?  The McDonalds moonface isn't even running for president, is he?

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-07-23 15:21:58)

Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572
I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty and trust -- all absolute tenets of command. His biography, "Tour of Duty," by Douglas Brinkley, is replete with gross exaggerations, distortions of fact, contradictions and slanderous lies. His contempt for the military and authority is evident by even a most casual review of this biography. He arrived in-country with a strong anti-Vietnam War bias and a self-serving determination to build a foundation for his political future. He was aggressive, but vain and prone to impulsive judgment, often with disregard for specific tactical assignments. He was a "loose cannon." In an abbreviated tour of four months and 12 days, and with his specious medals secure, Lt.(jg) Kerry bugged out and began his infamous betrayal of all United States forces in the Vietnam War. That included our soldiers, our marines, our sailors, our coast guardsmen, our airmen, and our POWs. His leadership within the so-called Vietnam Veterans Against the War and testimony before Congress in 1971 charging us with unspeakable atrocities remain an undocumented but nevertheless meticulous stain on the men and women who honorably stayed the course. Senator Kerry is not fit for command.

-- Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman, USN (retired)
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,992|7074|949

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty and trust -- all absolute tenets of command. His biography, "Tour of Duty," by Douglas Brinkley, is replete with gross exaggerations, distortions of fact, contradictions and slanderous lies. His contempt for the military and authority is evident by even a most casual review of this biography. He arrived in-country with a strong anti-Vietnam War bias and a self-serving determination to build a foundation for his political future. He was aggressive, but vain and prone to impulsive judgment, often with disregard for specific tactical assignments. He was a "loose cannon." In an abbreviated tour of four months and 12 days, and with his specious medals secure, Lt.(jg) Kerry bugged out and began his infamous betrayal of all United States forces in the Vietnam War. That included our soldiers, our marines, our sailors, our coast guardsmen, our airmen, and our POWs. His leadership within the so-called Vietnam Veterans Against the War and testimony before Congress in 1971 charging us with unspeakable atrocities remain an undocumented but nevertheless meticulous stain on the men and women who honorably stayed the course. Senator Kerry is not fit for command.

-- Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman, USN (retired)
Neither do I (believe he is fit to be Commander-In-Chief).  I wasn't aware, is he running again or have you been preparing this post for 7 years?

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-07-23 15:33:20)

CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6997

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

It's amazing how many supposedly patriotic Americans can lambast someone who did his duty, received three purple hearts AND A BRONZE MEDAL FOR RESCUING A COLLEAGUE.

And you call liberals unpatriotic. Pathetic.
Actually its amazing that lefty's like you are so gullible to believe in a man that lost a presidential election because he refused to release all his questionable military records.
Don't get me wrong, I think 99% of American politicians are corrupt, deceitful, self-serving, plutocratic cunts - whether democrat or republican. Don't let my post delude you into thinking I like John Kerry. Enjoy your two-party system: I'm content with my proportional representation based multi-party parliamentary elections thanks.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-07-23 15:33:41)

topal63
. . .
+533|7160

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

What is your agenda?  The McDonalds moonface isn't even running for president, is he?
What he said...
Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572
My agenda?....as a combat veteran I despise Kerry...he got his fake medals... bugged out of Vietnam..and then established a political career on slandering his fellow veterans.
(T)eflon(S)hadow
R.I.P. Neda
+456|7271|Grapevine, TX

usmarine2005 wrote:

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

"After returning from a tour of duty that lasted an astonishing four months"

I didn't know that.  Why was it only four months?
He got 3 "Band-Aid" purple Hearts in four months and was entitled to leave combat...amazing in only 4 months he got all those medals..what a Rambo.
I need to read up on that.  Sounds fishy.
True fact... quite true...

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard