1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Vietnam Veterans, What is your oppinion of Kerry?

Discussion in 'Military' started by Billnew, Jul 14, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Gunny

    Gunny Remnant Supporter

    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    29
    Faith:
    Christian

    “ … to have former military people actually come up and testify against our activities in Vietnam and to accuse us of being war criminals was devastating. and then to have this man end up in the Congress of the United States is unbelievable and of course he has been anti-military, anti-defense.” (Excerpt from “Stolen Honor”)

    - Ronald Webb
    Former Vietnam POW








    Fahrenheit 1971: the radicalism of the young John Kerry Author: Dated: Saturday, August 28 2004 @ 11:00 AM PDT Viewed: 5544 times -- by Mackubin Thomas Owens

    We will not quickly join those who march on Veterans' Day waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the "greater glory of the United States." We will not accept the rhetoric. We will not readily join the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars--in fact, we will find it hard to join anything at all and when we do, we will demand relevancy such as other organizations have recently been unable to provide. We will not take solace from the creation of monuments or the naming of parks after a select few of the thousands of dead Americans and Vietnamese. We will not uphold the traditions which decorously memorialize that which was base and grim. . . . We are asking America to turn from false glory, hollow victory, fabricated foreign threats, fear which threatens us as a nation, shallow pride which feeds of fear.

    John F. Kerry
    Epilogue to The New Soldier (1971)

    WHEN THE VIETNAM VETERANS' MEMORIAL was unveiled in Washington, D.C., in the 1980s, there was a great deal of talk about "healing" the divisions of the Vietnam war. The controversy generated by the anti-Kerry book Unfit for Command and ads run by an organization called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth criticizing John Kerry's record in Vietnam and his actions after he returned indicates that there is still a lot of "healing" to do. Indeed, the divisions over the Vietnam war may well never heal as long as those who fought it and those who protested it are still alive. This is because the very act of remembering Vietnam places one in the midst of a culture war.

    On the one side in this culture war are those who believe that Vietnam wasn't very different from other wars. The cause was just, but it was as affected by ambiguities as any other war, including World War II. In the end, the U.S. defeat was the result of strategic failure, not moral failure. Those who fought it were doing their duty as they saw it, just as their fathers and grandfathers had done theirs when the times demanded it of them.

    On the other side are those for whom the Vietnam war represented the very essence of evil. The United States had no business fighting this war and could never have won it. It was not like other wars. All it did was wreck lives, American and Vietnamese. It was one continuous atrocity. War crimes were par for the course. Those who fought it were different from those who fought the "good war." They returned home psychologically if not physically crippled--homeless, drug addicted, and likely to commit suicide.

    Some on the anti-Vietnam side have moderated their views in light of what happened in the aftermath of the U.S. withdrawal from Southeast Asia. They stipulate that they were wrong about communism. The cost of American defeat was high, especially to the South Vietnamese and Cambodians. The price of South Vietnam's "liberation" was, in addition to Saigon's war dead, a minimum of 100,000 summary executions at the hands of the Communist liberators, a million and a half "boat people," a like number of individuals sentenced to "reeducation camps," genocide in Cambodia, and a perceived shift in the "correlation of forces" that encouraged Soviet adventurism throughout the 1970s. But as Mickey Kaus admitted in an essay that appeared in Slate in May 2001 amid the furor over whether the killing of certain civilians by men under the command of former Nebraska senator Bob Kerrey amounted to a war crime, those who had moderated their antiwar views still wanted to be honored for their "idealism": "The Thanh Phong story," Kaus wrote, "reminds us that avoiding serving in Vietnam had an honorable and realistic ethical basis (in addition to its realistic selfish basis)."

    But others on the anti-Vietnam side of the culture war continue to take their bearings, either directly or indirectly, from the hard-core opinion of those who believe that the Vietnam war represented all that is evil about America--capitalistic exploitation, racism, and imperialism. Noam Chomsky and H. Bruce Franklin exemplify this view. As the latter writes in "The Vietnam War and the Culture Wars," Vietnam, far from being "an aberration, some kind of wayward 'mistake' by a nation long leading the world's march to progress," instead "typified the nation's history from colonial settler regime to global empire." Indeed, for Franklin, the Vietnam war was the culmination of the 600-year-old European crusade to oppress people of color throughout the globe--thus the mass murderer Lt. William Calley (My Lai) was only the latest manifestation of the spirit of that earlier mass murderer, Christopher Columbus.

    During his presidential campaign, John Kerry has sought to portray himself as a member of the first group--a veteran proud of his service in Vietnam. In his remarks on July 25 at the Democratic National Convention, Kerry said, "We [veterans] fought for this nation because we loved it. . . . I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as president." But this sentiment is completely at odds with his infamous testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971, wherein he said he and those he spoke for were "ashamed of and hated what we were called on to do in Southeast Asia. . . And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom . . . is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy."

    The fact is that most Americans have no idea how radical Kerry's views on Vietnam were. His April 1971 Senate testimony (reprinted in full on pages 9-12) could have been written by Chomsky or Franklin. But the larger reality is even more troubling. In his indispensable America in Vietnam, Guenter Lewy notes the establishment of a veritable war-crimes industry, supported by the Soviet Union, as early as 1965. As Ion Mihai Pacepa, a former Romanian intelligence chief, has recounted, the Soviets set up permanent international organizations--including the International War Crimes Tribunal and the Stockholm Conference on Vietnam--"to aid or to conduct operations to help Americans dodge the draft or defect, to demoralize its army with anti-American propaganda, to conduct protests, demonstrations, and boycotts, and to sanction anyone connected with the war." Pacepa claims to have been responsible for fabricating stories about U.S. atrocities in Vietnam and "flacking" them to Western news organizations. Lewy writes that "the Communists made skillful use of their worldwide propaganda apparatus . . . and they found many Western intellectuals only too willing to accept every conceivable allegation of [American] wrongdoing at face value." The Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), a small, radical group that never exceeded a membership of 7,000 (including John Kerry) from a pool of nearly 3 million Vietnam (and 9 million Vietnam-era) veterans, essentially "Americanized" Soviet propaganda. When he testified before the Senate in 1971, Kerry was merely repeating charges that had been making the rounds since 1965.


    Remainder of text
     
  2. winteralfs

    winteralfs New Member

    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Non-Denominational
    “ … to have former military people actually come up and testify against our activities in Vietnam and to accuse us of being war criminals was devastating. and then to have this man end up in the Congress of the United States is unbelievable and of course he has been anti-military, anti-defense.” (Excerpt from “Stolen Honor”)

    - Ronald Webb
    Former Vietnam POW



    This is very sad. Of course further harming American POWs through physical damage, or emotional damage is a terrible thing. The best difference between our country and the communism that we were fighting against is that fact that A John Kerry could and would testify like he did. If a soldier did disagree with our countries policies durring a war, and witness what he considered terrible injustices with how that war was being fought, to testify to that is of the utmost importance.

    Fahrenheit 1971: the radicalism of the young John Kerry Author: Dated: Saturday, August 28 2004 @ 11:00 AM PDT Viewed: 5544 times -- by Mackubin Thomas Owens

    We will not quickly join those who march on Veterans' Day waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the "greater glory of the United States." We will not accept the rhetoric. We will not readily join the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars--in fact, we will find it hard to join anything at all and when we do, we will demand relevancy such as other organizations have recently been unable to provide. We will not take solace from the creation of monuments or the naming of parks after a select few of the thousands of dead Americans and Vietnamese. We will not uphold the traditions which decorously memorialize that which was base and grim. . . . We are asking America to turn from false glory, hollow victory, fabricated foreign threats, fear which threatens us as a nation, shallow pride which feeds of fear.



    sounds a lot like some of the issues raised by the war in Iraq. Promoting a culture of fear etc... As to monuments concerning the vietnam war specifically, I would argue for there importance. Honoring the soldiers who fought in that war is of the utmost importance becuase of their treatment when they returned home. That does not mean we should turn a blind eye to critizing policies of the war, howver, i consider them 2 seperate things.

    WHEN THE VIETNAM VETERANS' MEMORIAL was unveiled in Washington, D.C., in the 1980s, there was a great deal of talk about "healing" the divisions of the Vietnam war. The controversy generated by the anti-Kerry book Unfit for Command and ads run by an organization called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth criticizing John Kerry's record in Vietnam and his actions after he returned indicates that there is still a lot of "healing" to do. Indeed, the divisions over the Vietnam war may well never heal as long as those who fought it and those who protested it are still alive. This is because the very act of remembering Vietnam places one in the midst of a culture war.


    very true. however, I believe healing can take place, but it involves dealing with facts and not innuendo, always treating the soldiers who fought the war with respect, and never burying or overlooking controversial elements of the war and its battles/operations.

    On the one side in this culture war are those who believe that Vietnam wasn't very different from other wars. The cause was just, but it was as affected by ambiguities as any other war, including World War II. In the end, the U.S. defeat was the result of strategic failure, not moral failure. Those who fought it were doing their duty as they saw it, just as their fathers and grandfathers had done theirs when the times demanded it of them.

    I would agree with some of this. I do believe that the war was "lost" due to strategic failures and not moral ones, however I think there is overlap there. I believe we didnt understand how the people of vietnam as a whole would percieve are presence there. Fighting colonization, as they were the french, and we were simply an extension of that fight. We of course fully suported the french durring their war there, and when the french finally pulled out we were furious. We then staged the golf of tonkin incedent to allow us to get involved, and our vietnam war ensued. We also didnt fully grasp ho chi min, a leader who even quoted our counrties founding documents and leaders when he was fighting for a unified and "free" vietnam before our involvment. we consistenly went against him, and when we did go to war, he was still very much a peoples hero. There are many many policy issues i would take issue with, but i dont believe we "lost" the war due to any lack of courage or lack of moral fortitude in our general fighting men.

    On the other side are those for whom the Vietnam war represented the very essence of evil. The United States had no business fighting this war and could never have won it. It was not like other wars. All it did was wreck lives, American and Vietnamese. It was one continuous atrocity. War crimes were par for the course. Those who fought it were different from those who fought the "good war." They returned home psychologically if not physically crippled--homeless, drug addicted, and likely to commit suicide.

    Again some of this I would agree with, but not to the extreme tone of the language. It was a very tragic war, so it did "wreck many lives" and devastate, and continues to devastate, the country of vietnam. it was also hard on America, not just in the soldiers lost and wounded, but too our national confidense. I do believe there were many atrocities in that war. Many vets did not come home to be homeless and "damaged" for good. Most are leading normal and productive lives, and carry the memories of their time there personally and peacfully.

    Some on the anti-Vietnam side have moderated their views in light of what happened in the aftermath of the U.S. withdrawal from Southeast Asia. They stipulate that they were wrong about communism. The cost of American defeat was high, especially to the South Vietnamese and Cambodians. The price of South Vietnam's "liberation" was, in addition to Saigon's war dead, a minimum of 100,000 summary executions at the hands of the Communist liberators, a million and a half "boat people," a like number of individuals sentenced to "reeducation camps," genocide in Cambodia, and a perceived shift in the "correlation of forces" that encouraged Soviet adventurism throughout the 1970s. But as Mickey Kaus admitted in an essay that appeared in Slate in May 2001 amid the furor over whether the killing of certain civilians by men under the command of former Nebraska senator Bob Kerrey amounted to a war crime, those who had moderated their antiwar views still wanted to be honored for their "idealism": "The Thanh Phong story," Kaus wrote, "reminds us that avoiding serving in Vietnam had an honorable and realistic ethical basis (in addition to its realistic selfish basis)."

    Very true,. The North Vietnamese were/are a brutal and represive regime that was not kind too its own people as well as our G.Is. I would have some issue with America reliquishing all responcability for the millions dead in cambodia, as there is more to that then simply the communists killing disbelievers. The U.S. bombing of the country as well as the Pol Pot regime being backed unofficially by our country even after knowlege of what was taking place there was public, leaves our hands more then a little dirty.

    But others on the anti-Vietnam side of the culture war continue to take their bearings, either directly or indirectly, from the hard-core opinion of those who believe that the Vietnam war represented all that is evil about America--capitalistic exploitation, racism, and imperialism. Noam Chomsky and H. Bruce Franklin exemplify this view. As the latter writes in "The Vietnam War and the Culture Wars," Vietnam, far from being "an aberration, some kind of wayward 'mistake' by a nation long leading the world's march to progress," instead "typified the nation's history from colonial settler regime to global empire." Indeed, for Franklin, the Vietnam war was the culmination of the 600-year-old European crusade to oppress people of color throughout the globe--thus the mass murderer Lt. William Calley (My Lai) was only the latest manifestation of the spirit of that earlier mass murderer, Christopher Columbus.


    A bit of hyperbole, and definately not the whole story. I would have issues with much of this as being simply extreme rhetoric, and not a very complex view our our national history. I would be sympathetic to some of its implied specifics.

    During his presidential campaign, John Kerry has sought to portray himself as a member of the first group--a veteran proud of his service in Vietnam. In his remarks on July 25 at the Democratic National Convention, Kerry said, "We [veterans] fought for this nation because we loved it. . . . I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as president." But this sentiment is completely at odds with his infamous testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971, wherein he said he and those he spoke for were "ashamed of and hated what we were called on to do in Southeast Asia. . . And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom . . . is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy


    the problems i do have with Kerry have to do with his seeming to flip flop when the wind suites him. He has tempored or reversed his oppinion on some of these things, and he was very active in the anti-war movement on returning home. So while I probably do side close to him in the spirit of some of his actions and comments, i can fully understand those who are disgusted by his seemingly opurtunistic behavior at times.

    The fact is that most Americans have no idea how radical Kerry's views on Vietnam were. His April 1971 Senate testimony (reprinted in full on pages 9-12) could have been written by Chomsky or Franklin. But the larger reality is even more troubling. In his indispensable America in Vietnam, Guenter Lewy notes the establishment of a veritable war-crimes industry, supported by the Soviet Union, as early as 1965. As Ion Mihai Pacepa, a former Romanian intelligence chief, has recounted, the Soviets set up permanent international organizations--including the International War Crimes Tribunal and the Stockholm Conference on Vietnam--"to aid or to conduct operations to help Americans dodge the draft or defect, to demoralize its army with anti-American propaganda, to conduct protests, demonstrations, and boycotts, and to sanction anyone connected with the war." Pacepa claims to have been responsible for fabricating stories about U.S. atrocities in Vietnam and "flacking" them to Western news organizations. Lewy writes that "the Communists made skillful use of their worldwide propaganda apparatus . . . and they found many Western intellectuals only too willing to accept every conceivable allegation of [American] wrongdoing at face value." The Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), a small, radical group that never exceeded a membership of 7,000 (including John Kerry) from a pool of nearly 3 million Vietnam (and 9 million Vietnam-era) veterans, essentially "Americanized" Soviet propaganda. When he testified before the Senate in 1971, Kerry was merely repeating charges that had been making the rounds since 1965.


    This is why it is of the utmost imprtance too always get to the truth, and deal with facts and not innuendo. If in fact there were examples of atrocities durring the vietnam war, which of course their were, we have to know when and where they happened, how they came to happen etc...covering up missions gone bad, or discarding data when it is embarassing to the military serves no one in the long run. Its hard to always trust the military to police itself, as they have a history of trying to bury less then admirable behavior or outcomes to their policy. The truth through accurate records, and testimony will show or discredeit any and all activity durring the vietnam conflict. There has been too much personal testimony of nasty behavior over there for me to dismiss the reports of actrocites being committed. Much of this lies in the definiton, with free fire zones and a enemy that could come in many forms, different people draw the line at combatent in different places. The facts when they come out as common knowlege let us deal with the war in the way that we should, honestly. We should work to make ammends when misdeeds are uncovered and stand tall about our genuine accomplishments, of which there was plenty. To pretend that there were no more dirty policy in vietnam then any other war is not accurate, howver, and we as a nation need to come to terms with this officially, no matter how publically embarassing. It is the right thing to do.
     
  3. daidhaid

    daidhaid walkin' slack

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    25
    Faith:
    Deist
    winteralfs:
    Excelent and balanced take on the issue.
     
  4. Gunny

    Gunny Remnant Supporter

    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    29
    Faith:
    Christian
    Stolen Honor


    “And they, the interrogator went through all of these statements from John Kerry. He starts pounding on the table. “See here, this naval officer, he admits that you are a criminal.” (Excerpt from “Stolen Honor”)

    - James Warner
    Former Vietnam POW


    “This man committed an act of treason. He lied, he besmirched our name and he did it for self-interest. And now he wants us to forget.” (Excerpt from “Stolen Honor”)

    - Colonel George (Bud) Day
    Former Vietnam POW






    Welcome to KerryLied.com

    John Kerry told the world we were war criminals who raped, tortured and murdered in Vietnam. Now, thirty-three years later, we will tell America the truth. Join us at the rally we call:


    KERRY LIED . . . while good men died
    A gathering of Vietnam veterans from across America Where: Upper Senate Park, Washington, D.C. It is easy to get to, shady and pretty, with a great view of the Capitol dome in back of the speaker's platform. THIS IS A NEW LOCATION AS OF 7/17/04

    When: Sunday, Sept 12, 2004 2:00-4:00 PM (EDT)

    Why: To tell the truth about Vietnam veterans.
    To counter the lies told about Vietnam veterans by John Kerry

    All Vietnam veterans and their families and supporters are asked to attend.Other veterans are invited as honored guests.

    Register by Clicking Here
     
  5. daidhaid

    daidhaid walkin' slack

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    25
    Faith:
    Deist
    Uhh well about the POW interrogators story...
    McCain has stated he was never told anything like that.
    He was a POW, and he has said repeatedly this was not an issue.
    One other point he makes is that the POW's assumed the interrogators were trying to manipulate and used lies.

    Uhh one more thing war does produce atrocities. Kerry had the truth on that.
     
  6. Gunny

    Gunny Remnant Supporter

    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    29
    Faith:
    Christian
    Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2004 12:35 p.m. EST


    McCain: Hanoi Hilton Guards Taunted POWs With Kerry's Testimony

    These days, former Vietnam War POW Sen. John McCain has nothing but praise for his fellow Vietnam veteran Sen. John Kerry, the Democrats' current presidential front-runner.

    But after he was released from the Hanoi Hilton in 1973, McCain publicly complained that testimony by Kerry and others before J. William Fulbright's Senate Foreign Relations Committee was "the most effective propaganda [my North Vietnamese captors] had to use against us."

    "They used Senator Fulbright a great deal," McCain wrote in the May 14, 1973, issue of U.S. News & World Report. While he was languishing in a North Vietnamese prison cell, Kerry was telling the Fulbright committee that U.S. soldiers were committing war crimes in Vietnam as a matter of course.

    Sen. Ted Kennedy, a key Kerry presidential backer, was "quoted again and again" by jailers at the Hanoi Hilton, McCain said.

    "Clark Clifford was another [North Vietnamese] favorite," the ex-POW told U.S. News, "right after he had been Secretary of Defense under President Johnson."

    "When Ramsey Clark came over [my jailers] thought that was a great coup for their cause," McCain recalled. Months earlier, Sen. Kerry had appeared with Clark at the April 1971 Washington, D.C., anti-war protest that showcased his testimony before the Fulbright Committee.

    "All through this period," wrote McCain, his captors were "bombarding us with anti-war quotes from people in high places back in Washington. This was the most effective propaganda they had to use against us."

    McCain biographer Paul Alexander chronicled the Arizona Republican's anger toward Kerry during their early careers in the Senate together.

    "For many years McCain held Kerry's actions against him because, while McCain was a POW in the Hanoi Hilton, Kerry was organizing veterans back home in the U.S. to protest the war."

    In his 2002 book, "Man of the People: The Life of John McCain," Alexander says that the two Vietnam vets finally reconciled in the early 1990s after having "a long - and at times emotional - conversation about Vietnam" during a mutual trip to Kuwait. Later, Kerry sought to minimize the rift, telling Alexander: "Our differences occurred when we were kids, or at least close to being kids. It was a long time ago, and we both came back and realized that there were a lot of difficulties in the prosecution of that war."

    All Rights Reserved © 2004 NewsMax.com
     
  7. daidhaid

    daidhaid walkin' slack

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    25
    Faith:
    Deist
    In his 2002 book, "Man of the People: The Life of John McCain," Alexander says that the two Vietnam vets finally reconciled in the early 1990s after having "a long - and at times emotional - conversation about Vietnam" during a mutual trip to Kuwait. Later, Kerry sought to minimize the rift, telling Alexander: "Our differences occurred when we were kids, or at least close to being kids. It was a long time ago, and we both came back and realized that there were a lot of difficulties in the prosecution of that war."


    well if McCain can set it aside and respect Kerry maybe others should give it a try.

    A lot of people spoke against the war. I'm glad they did.
    If they hadn't my kids would probably be over there dying for no good reason.
    The alternative to dissent is to shut up and let it happen.

    Oh and to the protestors,,, Thanks for helping to get me home.
     
  8. Billnew

    Billnew Legend

    Messages:
    20,991
    Likes Received:
    283
    Faith:
    Christian
    Protesting a war is one thing, lying and exagerating about your fellow veterans, and having closed door meetings with the enemy leaders without Government authorization in a foreign country, I call this treason.
    Maybe we should forget this too?

    How about we remember the Politcal record of Kerry's vote, the one he didn't want to talk about at his convention. His voting against everything we used in the wars. He is really for our military.

    By the way, I am glad you are here to debate with. My Uncle died in Vietnam, but didn't fall for 6-8 years later. Cancer, I figure the orange got him. Thanks for your service. I know not many said that.:thumbsup:
     
  9. Gunny

    Gunny Remnant Supporter

    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    29
    Faith:
    Christian
    Daidhaid, I respect your service during Vietnam.

    I do not nor can not respect Kerry for his actions upon his leaving Vietnam after his four months and twelve days in country.

    My eldest son is in the USMC and has been serving his country for eight years. I do not see what he is doing for his country as in vain aka "for no good reason".

    I do not see my service to my country during the Vietnam War as in vain aka "for no good reason".

    I do not see the service of my Fellow Brother In Arms during the Vietnam War as in vain aka "for no good reason".
     
  10. daidhaid

    daidhaid walkin' slack

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    25
    Faith:
    Deist
    I personally don't think he exagerated or put veterans down. He called attention to the way the war was conducted. He spoke with the over the top flamboyance of the day.
    It was a time of excesses on all sides. Rhetoric was heavy and times were hard. The war took a great many who never believed it was right, but were forced to serve.
    The atrocities he described were the sorts of things that happened.
    He quoted other vets without implicating them in public.
    I'll be honest, would not want to be judged today for what happened then.
    To many want to say it was all honor, but the only honor I saw there was in the bonds amongst us. What happened in Nam was wrong, or at the very least went wrong. It was pointless and out of control.
    The only point was to keep faith with your fellow soldier.
    Kerry tried, imperfectly, to make that all clear.
    By 71 when he went to the hearings Nam was really a mess.
    He wanted to end the war. Our leaders tolerance for atrocities was exposed.
    Our leaders military and civilian knew it was degerating out of control.
    He wanted the same system that prosecuted Calley to go after the leaders.
    He wasn't indicting vets so much as pulling back the covers on what America already knew.
    And the talking to the enemy charge.
    There he violated law he tried to negotiate a pow release while in France.
    North Viet Nam wanted a VVAW contingent to goto the North this would have been a big photo op and serious propoganda, it also would have released POW's probably in 72.
    I think it was stupid and illconsidered, the folly of youth. Very controversial at the time, but well intentioned .
    Remember the times it was a time of great national conflict America was eating its young.
    It was a long time ago for most Americans


    How about we remember the Politcal record of Kerry's vote, the one he didn't want to talk about at his convention. His voting against everything we used in the wars. He is really for our military.[/QUOTE]


    Yeah well there you have real reasons to vote Bush. If his voting record bothers you more than the current presidents track record then that's a good reason to vote bush in.
    I myself would prefer a progressive even radical leader willing to find new solutions.
    Jerry Brown, heh heh heh there are many leaders I would choose over Kerry if I were given a choice.
    However, there are even more I would choose over George Bush, even his Dad or his Mom.
    I'd like McCain.
    I'd really like a 3rd. party, run off elections, and no electoral college, and a safe tamperproof election.
    I'd also lower the voting age to 16 and get kids to vote before they are disillusioned.

    Thanks, even though we are in dissagreement on politics we still have much in common..
    Sorry about your Uncle you know the casualty count is to low for that war as it does not include guys that died later, as a result.
    That's a wrong the government isn't likely to correct, anytime soon.
     
  11. daidhaid

    daidhaid walkin' slack

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    25
    Faith:
    Deist
    And I respect yours as well.
    As far as Kerry goes everyone gets to have an opinion.
    I honestly feel that Kerry did not do us vets wrong.
    I think he probably got his medals the way most officers got them.
    With a little help from his friends calling attention to his actions, in combat.
    Furthermore, I harbor no ill will to him for his actions as an activist.
    That really is the crux of the matter.
    George Bush would love to have Kerry's war record but he can't, he dodged the bullets.
    So he goes after his anti-war record.
    This should be a blip on the screen. a speed bump in the race.
    But no it has to be another divisive wedge issue.
    The election should spin on the issues of today and the hopes for tomorrow.
    I'm hoping Kerry is a smarter more deliberate man.

    As to the no good reason and pointless nature of the Nam war,,,
    I'm not saying what we did for each other and what motivated us to serve was pointless and without reason.
    The care grunts show for their buddies is noble beyond words.
    Bravery is always to be respected and honored even in a foe.

    What I condemn are the policy's and moral failures that propelled so many into a war that hurt us as individuals and as a nation.
    Our Government was our enemy, and previous vets didn't raise an alarm.
    We trusted our leaders and they lied, and we died.
    There you go, pointless and no good reason, but it is all on the government not on the troops.
    What we had for a reason was each other, the war itself had no reason.
    Semper Fi.
     
  12. Gunny

    Gunny Remnant Supporter

    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    29
    Faith:
    Christian
    President Bush, doesn't need Kerry's war record. Bush, has repeatedly commended Kerry for his service in Vietnam.

    Kerry's DNC speech was centered around his ability to be Commander in Chief due to his four months and twelve days in Vietnam. Kerry, spent twenty-six seconds during his DNC speech talking of his nineteen years in the Senate.

    This past week at the RNC, no speaker stated that Kerry was unpatriotic. No one stated anything negative regarding Kerry's time in Vietnam or his actions upon his return from Vietnam.

    Zell Miller, a Marine, and a Democrat, the keynote speaker at the RNC, spoke sternly regarding Kerry's voting record (over nineteen years) in the Senate. He spoke also of Kerry's wavering on vital issues concerning the National Defense.

    Kerry, and his election team, have not nor will not speak of Kerry's Senate record for it is a dismal record at best, especially for an indivdual wanting to be the Commander in Chief.

    Kerry, held a midnight rally which occured shortly after the conclusion of the RNC.

    Kerry's message was "How dare they attack my patriotism".

    The only sad commentary on Kerry's midnight message is that no speaker at the RNC stated Kerry was unpatriotic.

    I truly understand that Kerry desires to keep returning to his four months and twelve days in Vietnam for his Nineteen Year Senate Record is quite pathetic for one who is seeking to be Commander in Chief.


    Semper Fi
     
  13. daidhaid

    daidhaid walkin' slack

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    25
    Faith:
    Deist
    I think Kerry has been pushed into this defensive strategy, of touting his experiences in Nam, by the attacks which are very harsh and which were scripted out of the GOP convention.
    Just like Kerry wanted to keep his hands clean at the D. convention by not letting speakers get ugly towards Bush.
    Bush also doesn't want his hand seen in the attacks on Kerry's service. It should be a peripheral issue, for both of them. Not just in mouthed words but in strategy as well.
    Patriotism as defined by an opponent is a low attack even coming from surrogates.

    I don't want to see the military over or under funded. These are legitimate policy differences.
    I want personal freedoms to trump security issues.
    Why surrender the freedoms we are fighting for.
    I want National healthcare, real jobs, fair trade, serious immigration policy, a New mid East and Israel policy, on and on.
    None of the candidates hit the mark for all of the issues I'm concerned about.

    So I'm left with the Iraq War. I do believe we were lied to, and that Bush had this war and the subsequent intrusions on our liberty planned before 9/11/.
    9/11 brought those authoritarian plans out of the weeds and into the Garden.

    Kerry is not an anti-war candidate but he is a more deliberate thoughtful man.
    I believe he will restore our allies confidence and work to get us out of the quagmire.

    In other words he didn't start the Iraq War , so by default he gets my vote.
    His voting record won't mean he has carte blanche to change American Policy, it means another path will be debated and considered.
    All the usual political dealmaking will go on.
    Bush doesn't deserve a second term to solidify big business and it agends to control America.
    Nader couldn't handle the war Kerry is the best alternative in these troubled times.

    We need to get more of the "People" out to vote, loose the electoral college, and make elections safe and fair.
    I'd like to see kids at the age of 16 given a 1/2 vote when they get a drivers license.
    Teach them to vote. Too many think it is useless, that's why we see anarchy growing.
     
  14. Gunny

    Gunny Remnant Supporter

    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    29
    Faith:
    Christian
    “This man committed an act of treason. He lied, he besmirched our name and he did it for self-interest. And now he wants us to forget.” (Excerpt from “Stolen Honor”)

    - Colonel George (Bud) Day
    Former Vietnam POW





    The New Soldier

    [​IMG]
    The picture above is the ORIGINAL cover of John Kerry's book THE NEW SOLDIER. John Kerry's friends, the so called Vietnam Veterans Against the War, were mocking this scene photographed during the Second World War. 6,825 American boys died to plant that flag on Iwo Jima.

    In JOHN KERRY's own words: "And so a New Soldier has returned to America, to a nation torn apart by the killing we were asked to do. But, unlike veterans of other wars and some of this one, the New Soldier does not accept the old myths. We will not quickly join those who march on Veteran's Day waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the "greater glory of the United States." "We will not readily join the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars...." "We will not uphold traditions which decorously memorialize that which was base and grim"

    Excerpts taken from John Kerry's book THE NEW SOLDIER. They are the first few lines of the epilogue. Scroll down and read it yourself.

    Just after JOHN KERRY came back from Vietnam, he wrote the book THE NEW SOLDIER. The book is out of print. John Kerry does not allow the publisher to reprint it. To make a rational decision on November 2, you need to have all available facts. You can now read John Kerry's THE NEW SOLDIER online for FREE.
    Here are the PICTURES from THE NEW SOLDIER book.

    John Kerry's infamous testimony before the senate in 1971 in which he stated that American soldiers in Vietnam were rapists and warcriminals can be read online too.

    JOHN KERRY TESTIMONY BEFORE senate 1971.

    Read who exactly John Kerry's group the VIETNAM VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR are. Investigations have proved beyond a doubt that a lot of them were bogus "veterans".

    Read three chapters of John O'Neill's book UNFIT FOR COMMAND online for FREE.
    Read these chapters and buy the book. There is much more damning info in it about John F. Kerry. Buying the book will also give the writers a platform as bestselling authors to spread their message in the media. John O'Neill has said his royalties will go to a foundation, which helps the families of soldiers, who died serving this great country of ours.

    Please feel free to spread this site to those Americans, who might also be interested in reading John Kerry's book THE NEW SOLDIER and the three chapters from John O'Neill's book UNFIT FOR COMMAND.


    [​IMG]
    Sponsored by American Patriots Against John Kerry. Copyright © 1984-2004
     
  15. Gunny

    Gunny Remnant Supporter

    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    29
    Faith:
    Christian
    A True War Hero Speaks on Kerry Dated: Wednesday, September 01 2004 @ 09:00 AM PDT -- by Col. George "Bud" Day (to Joe Scarborough of MSNBC)

    Dear Joe:

    The major issue in the Swiftboat stories is, and always has been, what John Kerry did in 1971 after he returned from Vietnam. Kerry cast a long dark shadow over all Vietnam Veterans with his outright perjury before the Senate concerning atrocities in Vietnam. His stories to the Senate committee were absolute lies… fabrications… perjury… fantasies, with NO substance. That dark shadow has defamed the entire Vietnam War veteran population, and given "Aid and Comfort" to our enemies... the Vietnamese Communists. Kerry's stories were outright fabrications, and were intended for political gain with the radical left… McGovern, Teddy and Bobby Kennedy followers, Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden, and the radical left who fantasized that George McGovern was going to be elected in 1972. Little wonder that returning soldiers from Vietnam were spit upon and castigated as "baby killers".

    A returned war hero said so. Kerry cut a dashing figure as a war hero, lots of medals, and returned home because of multiple war wounds… even a silver star. His Senate testimony confirmed what every hippie had been chanting on the streets..."Hey hey LBJ…How many kids did you kill today"????? He obviously was running for political office in 1971.

    Until Lt. John O' Neil, himself a Swiftboat commander, spoke out before the 1972 elections against Kerry's outright deceptions, there was no one from the Swiftboat scene that could contradict Kerry's self serving lies.

    I was a POW of the Vietnamese in Hanoi in 1971, and I am aware that the testimony of John Kerry, the actions of Jane Fonda and Tom Hayden, and the radical left; all caused the commies to conclude that if they hung on, they would win. North Vietnamese General Bui Tin commented that every day the Communist leadership listened to world news over the radio to follow the growth of the anti-war movement. Visits to Hanoi by Jane Fonda and Ramsey Clark gave them confidence to hold in the face of battlefield reverses.

    The guts of it was that propaganda from the anti-war group was part of their combat strategy.

    While the Commies were hanging on, innumerable U.S. Soldiers, Sailors, Marines and Air Foce members were being killed in combat. Every battle wound to Americans after Kerry's misdirected testimony is related to Kerry's untruthfulness. John Kerry contributed to every one of these deaths with his lies about U.S. atrocities in Vietnam. He likewise defamed the U.S. with our allies and supporters. His conduct also extended the imprisonment of the Vietnam Prisoners of War, of which I was one. I am certain of at least one POW death after his testimony, which might have been prevented with an earlier release of the POWs.

    My friend and roommate Senator John S. McCain denounced the Swiftboat video by John O'Neil. I have a different take on the Swiftboat tape and disagree with my good friend John.

    John Kerry opened up his character as a war hero reporting for duty to the country with a hand salute...and his band of brothers...of which he was the chief hero. Most of his convention speech was about John Kerry...Vietnam hero, and his band of brothers. John Kerry's character is not only fair game, it is the primary issue. He wants to use Bill Clinton's "is", as an answer to his lack of character. The issue is trust. Can anyone trust John Kerry?? "Never lie, cheat or steal" is the West Point motto. When a witness perjures himself at trial, the judge notes that his testimony lacks credibility. Should we elect a known proven liar to lead us in wartime??

    I draw a direct comparison of General Benedict Arnold of the Revolutionary War, to Lieutenant John Kerry. Both went off to war, fought, and then turned against their country. General Arnold crossed over to the British for money and position. John Kerry crossed over to the Vietnamese with his assistance to the anti-war movement, and his direct liaison with the Vietnamese diplomats in Paris. His reward- Political gain. Senator…United States. His record as a Senator for twenty years has been pitiful. Conjure up, if you will, one major bill that he has sponsored.

    John Kerry for President? Ridiculous. Unthinkable. Unbelievable. Outrageous. This article was published by FrontPage Magazine



    Col. Geo. "Bud" Day is one of America's most decorated living warriors. A Vietnam POW from 1967- 1973, he is the proud owner of a Medal of Honor.




     
  16. winteralfs

    winteralfs New Member

    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Non-Denominational
    with a few veterens here chiming in, maybe we could get some personal testimony of what everyone saw in Vietnam. You men were there, so what was your experience there like? Please be as honest as possible, and let your voice and personal experiences be heard. I understand the private nature of what im asking, but I am genuinly curious to hear about all experiences dealing with that war. Honesty is whats most important.
     
  17. daidhaid

    daidhaid walkin' slack

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    25
    Faith:
    Deist
    I'm assuming were talking about war crimes or the absence thereof.
    I'm not so sure getting real specific is a good idea.
    And it could get very ugly.
    I think we should avoid saying some things.

    I'll start off with a small generic war crime I witnessed.
    My Plt. was deploying via truck convoy.
    As we passed through different areas, security was handled by different units from that area.
    At one point we stopped on the road quite near a village and paddys.
    A dead body was floating in a rice paddy.
    Even though this was a war zone and dead bodies were somewhat common, and even though this was not a free fire zone.
    It was decided this was evidence of combat and within the ROE.
    Furthermore, it was decided that the village near the floater must have had some involvement and was possibly hostile.
    Within a few minutes they considered dead guy a reasonable provocation.
    It was a very picturesque village,it looked like a National Geographics cover.
    Lush, quiet, peaceful, and totally unsuspecting. They just blew it away.
    We sat on the trucks and watched while they wasted the village.
    There was no return fire, no secondary explosions.

    When it was felt the threat was sufficiently eliminated we moved out again.
    None of us ever chambered a round they didn't need our help.
    We actually saw it as a chance to take a break and get off the trucks.
    BTW
    No one entered the village to check it out, they just left it smoldering.

    There you go one small, village sized warcrime.

    When you get angry at Kerry for relating the testimony of veterans at the hearings, take time to remember what it was like in those days.
    The war was nuts, no one I knew believed we were doing the right thing.
    We just did whatever, happened.
    Back home People were freaking out.
    The war was driving America mad back home too..
    Some decided the only way to end the war was to force America to see and hear.
    As it turns out they look to have been right.


    I read the winter soldier testimony I'm sorry to say most of it sounded true.
    There were a couple of stories that I deemed outright false, but other than those few none of it was surprising to me.
    Not that I saw everything depicted in the accounts. Nothing quite that dramatic, but I saw enough more than enough to make up my mind.
    You could get a feel for what was going down, we knew how it was.
    My understanding is that VVAW kept copies of the 214's of the vets who testified and attempted to verify.
    Their testimony is mostly believable and consistent with what could happen in-country.

    I just remembered the plt. discussion on mutilating and marking bodies.
    Think about that. As far as we were concerned there was no outright rule prohibiting it. No one was telling us no.
    We discussed it and reached a consensus, and stuck to it.
    Today that sounds crazy, we were kids deciding the morality of something that wacked out, in a war we knew was wrong.
    It was a bad time.
     
  18. Gunny

    Gunny Remnant Supporter

    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    29
    Faith:
    Christian
    This thread is about what Vietnam Veterans think about Kerry.

    The thread is not entitled:" so what was your experience there like?"


    You state the following:"I understand the private nature of what I'm asking" and then tell of your curiosity to hear about experiences dealing with war.

    IMHO, CF message boards is not the proper place to document, "so what was your experience there like?"
     
  19. winteralfs

    winteralfs New Member

    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Non-Denominational
  20. Gunny

    Gunny Remnant Supporter

    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    29
    Faith:
    Christian
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.