|
SwiftVets.com Service to Country
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
LewWaters Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004 Posts: 4042 Location: Washington State
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | It seems to me that the best strategy is to not make Vietnam an issue. |
You're telling this to the wrong ones. Vietnam wasn't an issue until John Kerry started making it one. So far, all he stands on is his "war hero" status and it's dubious at best. It's a pattern he's used throughout his Senatorial career, except this time, he is being called on it.
His anti-war activites are also part of the issue, as has been discussed here for months now. _________________ Clark County Conservative |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GenrXr Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 05 Aug 2004 Posts: 1720 Location: Houston
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Who would you choose to lead the country in a all out war which was forced upon us by our adversary? 1. A LT Junior Grade with four months experience 35 years ago "fighting" in Vietnam; or 2. A Comander-in-Chief with four years of experience as Commander-in-Chief fighting the current war.
The Navy may have been different, but when I was flying combat in Vietnam 34 years age, the only thing we let the LT do for the first three months in country as a FNG was wipe their own ***. |
Damn good observation. If I might add, during the 80's our family did construction work on most of the military bases in the US and when we worked on Jacksonville, Florida we ran into a power hungry LT. My father told the foreman for our company goto the Master Chief on base. Once our foreman went to the Master Chief all crap from the LT stopped, but damn what good stories we have of that LT trying to push his power over the Master Chief. Every time the LT. said things would be done a certain way the Master Chief would comment hes just a stupid kid that comes and go but I run this base and the commander knows that. Well one day the LT. came to the MC and called him out and in front of my families work crew the NCO told him to go talk to the CIC...that was the last time our crew saw that LT. hehe true story _________________ "An activist is the person who cleans up the water, not the one claiming its dirty."
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing." Edmund Burke (1729-1797), Founder of Conservative Philosophy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Steve Z Rear Admiral
Joined: 20 Aug 2004 Posts: 687 Location: West Hartford CT
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 11:47 pm Post subject: Another Reply to Yankee Mark |
|
|
As you are, I am both a Yankee (Connecticut) and a "civi" (civilian). Intelligent people can disagree over whether Kerry's socialism or Bush's compassionate conservatism are better for this country.
But everybody can agree that America was attacked on 9/11/2001, so all voters need to consider who can be TRUSTED to defend America against foreign enemies. Kerry realizes that most people trust Republicans on this issue, so he has tried to campaign as a "war hero" and attack President Bush for not having served in Vietnam.
In my opinion, the greatest service that Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has rendered is reminding Americans of John Kerry's false accusations against his fellow soldiers before the United States Senate, his "negotiating" with the enemy, and his recommending a hasty withdrawal of American forces from Vietnam. At the time, he said that would lead to about 3000 casualties, but in fact it led to a the slaughter of millions of South Vietnamese people, whom America had defended beforehand.
I am 48 years old, but was only 14 when John Kerry testified before the Senate, so I was too young to make the connection between John Kerry the 1971 anti-war radical and John Kerry the "Vietnam veteran" Senator. Kerry is counting on the fact that about half the electorate is too young to really understand what Kerry did against his country, and SBVT is presenting the reasons why John Kerry cannot be trusted.
Kerry has already said he will withdraw the troops from Iraq within six months, essentially telling the enemies of the free Iraqi government to wait six months and take over. If Kerry was so terribly mistaken in 1971, and he betrayed his fellow soldiers, and negotiated with the enemy when he had no authority to do so, what harm could he inflict on America and its new Afghan and Iraqi allies if he became President?
If John Kerry lied to his superiors in the Navy to get medals, and lied to the Senate for political gain, and turned against those who risked their lives for him, it stands to reason that he will lie to the American people if he became President.
The message of SBVT is: KERRY CANNOT BE TRUSTED. _________________ The traitor will crater! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mcb58 Seaman Recruit
Joined: 02 Aug 2004 Posts: 42 Location: Mount Pocono,PA
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 11:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As I figured, Yankee Mark had his say and disappeared.
I don't agree with the President on all issues, all I know is that my brother, MSGT in Iraq, My nephew EM2 , My other nephew LCPL in Iraq and my son EKC all would rather not serve under Kerry.
WHY?????? Do they not trust him???
If Kerry didi down river for 3.1 miles, HE RAN
AN ACT OF COWARDICE????????? _________________
THE GREAT FIFTY-EIGHT |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lily Lieutenant
Joined: 08 Aug 2004 Posts: 244
|
Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
I find it interesting that people come here again and again to ask that people stop discussing John Kerry's Vietnam record and instead talk about his antiwar record.I think that's because as Fox News Sunday pointed out, Kerry's war record has now become Kerry's disputed war record.When not so long ago no one was allowed to raise questions about John Kerry's
"hero" status. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Polaris Rear Admiral
Joined: 16 Aug 2004 Posts: 626
|
Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lily,
That's exactly right. We don't have to prove that Kerry lied about his war record (although he did). All we have to do is make it disputed which takes almost all of Kerry's moral superiority away.
This is a direct hit at the waterline...and it is only going to get worse. _________________ -Polaris
Truth is Beauty |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kmmpatriot Lt.Jg.
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 Posts: 146
|
Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Polaris wrote: | Lily,
That's exactly right. We don't have to prove that Kerry lied about his war record (although he did). All we have to do is make it disputed which takes almost all of Kerry's moral superiority away.
This is a direct hit at the waterline...and it is only going to get worse. |
Well said and right onpoint, Polaris. As usual. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004 Posts: 5777
|
Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
mcb58 wrote: | As I figured, Yankee Mark had his say and disappeared.
|
Well, errr... ummm... YankeeMark didn't exactly have a choice. _________________ ~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mcb58 Seaman Recruit
Joined: 02 Aug 2004 Posts: 42 Location: Mount Pocono,PA
|
Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
_________________
THE GREAT FIFTY-EIGHT |
|
Back to top |
|
|
republicanveteran Commander
Joined: 29 Jul 2004 Posts: 333 Location: Texas
|
Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
I served under the most incompetent Commander in Chief, Jimmy Carter. I also served under one of the best commander-in-chief, Ronald Reagan.
I served under the 2nd most incompetent commander -in-chief, Johnson..
I served under another great commander-in-chief, Nixon.. Regardless of what everyone thought of his politics...
I did not serve under the coward-in-chief, clinton..
I do not want my son, who is a Petty Officer in the Navy to ever experiance a Carter, Johnson or Clinton. Kerry would even be worse, because he is a traitor... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cipher Vice Admiral
Joined: 10 Aug 2004 Posts: 902
|
Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | I find it interesting that people come here again and again to ask that people stop discussing John Kerry's Vietnam record and instead talk about his antiwar record. |
Let me preface this by saying this is NOT a personal attack on what you posted, only that I am using your quote as the basis for my argument. Please don't take offense. It's a great observation!
This is a very simple tactic, used to reframe the argument from the tangible, demonstrable, and provable FACTS of Kerry's character flaws to an argument about an opinion that Kerry holds. He has a right to his opinions -- as screwed up as they may be -- and there is nothing provably wrong about them. This, in the sense that there is no basis in hard documentation that his antiwar opinions actually caused harm. We can all think otherwise, and many of us deep in our guts KNOW otherwise, however, that isn't going to float a boat, because his opinion is living in the arena of ideas. And like it or not, ideas are not proveable as lies.
With his war record, however, there is hard evidence. There is a paper trail. There are documents, witnesses, and cooberation from the chain of command, all written down in black and white. His war wounds, his medals, his accounts of actions, and so forth are all solidly grounded in reality. They can be proven to be lies. And lying is not a good character trait in a commander. Lies sow mistrust, and when you're the POTUS, people all over the world are going to be taking you at your WORD. If you make a promise, they'll want to know you'll keep it.
So his WAR RECORD can be proven to be based on lies. Now, we can attack the opinions, because his is a proven liar. To just attack the ideas is to tilt at windmills. He has the right to be wrong. He does NOT have the right to lie with impugnity.
And that is where we need to be focused. On the provable lies that form the foundation of his deceitful, dangerous, and traitorous ideas. A proven liar is not a good nor effective president. Recent history bears this out.
Yes, they'd love us to attack his antiwar opinions. ANYTHING but his record. _________________ USMC 69-72, 7th Comm, 3rd MarDiv, FMFPAC
US Army 75-79, 97th Sig, SHAPE, NATO
Arkansas National Guard 79
Defense contractor for US Navy, SSPO, SP-20, SP-24, OP-12 84-92 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JonMoseley Seaman Recruit
Joined: 18 Aug 2004 Posts: 39 Location: Ashburn,Virginia
|
Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
tvaughan wrote: | My reaction:
We are here to spread the truth to as many people as we can.
What happens after that is not up to us. After that, let the chips fall where they may. America will get the president it votes for.
|
Yes, but America will get the President it deserves. And that might not be a good thing. How America responds when shown the truth will be a window into the soul of America. Do we choose a liar? _________________ Read first chapter of COLD PEACE for free at www.ColdPeace.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fortdixlover Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 12 May 2004 Posts: 1476
|
Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:34 am Post subject: Re: Playing into Kerry's hands? |
|
|
YankeeMark wrote: | It seems like Kerry wants to talk of nothing but Vietnam - it bolsters his anti-terrorism credentials.
- Bush's biggest weakness regarding the war on terror is his dubious lack of Vietnam experience. |
Bush has led two entire wars, one with the fastest military victory in history against a country with a large standing army, and has prevented an attack on U.S. soil to date consistent with the document The National Security Strategy of the United States of America ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf ) that he and his team authored. (Ever read it?) That is one hell of a set of credentials.
YankeeMark wrote: | After reviewing the SBVfT's arguments, it looks like Kerry might be guilty of exagerating his injuries, but overall, his record looks fairly impressive to me (sorry - maybe I'm just a dumb civi, but so is 99% of the American electorate) |
What exactly did you find impressive? In the face of his proven "exaggerations" (a.k.a. self-serving embellishments and mistruths), what exactly in his overall "record" can you believe?
FDL |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|