 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
josh
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 1
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kate
Admin
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 1891
Location: Upstate, New York
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 5:37 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Great link with the "morph"
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 6:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for that morphed picture - it led me to something I hadn't read entirely, before:
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=KerryONeill
Transcript of the Kerry/O'Neill debate on the Dick Cavett Show.
Wow! Well worth the time to read that one! So much perspective on the times.
O'Neill says that unless we do a good job of preparing the South Vietnamese before we pull out, there's going to be a bloodbath and Kerry says there probably won't.
O'Neill says that Vietnamization is the best process for regaining our POW's, John Kerry says that his way (immediate and unconditional pull-out) will result in the return of the prisoners. (He knows - he has Madame Binh's word, right?)
Kerry, evasive and O'Neill, tenacious. Polite, but tenacious.
I'd like to see these two debate, again. 'Cause something tells me that John O'Neill has collected just a few more salient debating points in the last 33 years. 
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hmmm... in that debate, John Kerry claims his Commanding Officer was relieved. Anybody know anything about such a relief?
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The bigger issue at hand is the question literally of how the United States is going to get out of Vietnam now, and I have said again and again this evening that we can set a date, that we can bring the prisoners home, but the point is I think this administration is still seeking some kind of victory over there. It is still committed to the idea totally of a non-communist regime, and I think that that's unrealistic in terms of the political forces that are at play in South Vietnam. In fact, in all of Southeast Asia. And we have learned, if we haven't learned anything by now, that we simply can't impose a settlement ourselves. |
Above is from John Kerry. Guess someone should have told the Thais, the Malays, the Singaporeans, the Indonesians.
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I think it's quite evident that certainly our prisoners will be released. I'd suggest if we got to the point where we had no one there, they be released under the following pre-conditions that's been suggested a number of times. First of all, we pay reparations to the North Vietnamese; second, we topple the Saigon government; and third, of course, we'd have to cease all aid to that government. I don't think the POWs, six of whom went to the Naval Academy in my class with me, would want us to do that. |
By O'Neill. Strikingly accurate.
| Quote: | | But we can guarantee them to come back tomorrow. |
By Kerry.
Now I understand Senator Kerry's position regarding POWs much better... if there were prisoners held after 1973, Kerry's own credibility was open to severe question. His ego was more important than those held.
| Quote: | MR. KERRY: Madame Binh doesn't hold the prisoners. San Tee [phonetic spelling] does, and he set a –
MR. O'NEILL: They both hold a number of prisoners. As a matter of fact, we've never even – we don't even know how many prisoners the Viet Cong and Laotians and Cambodians have because they've never identified any of them. |
| Quote: | MR. CAVETT: No one has said that there'll be a bloodbath if we pull out, which is a cliche we used to hear a lot. Does either of you still think there would be a –
MR. O'NEILL: I think if we pull out prematurely before a viable South Vietnamese government is established, that the record of the North Vietnamese in the past and the record of the Viet Cong in the area I served in at Operation [unintelligible] clearly indicates that's precisely what would happen in that country.
MR. CAVETT: That's a guess, of course.
MR. KERRY: I –
MR. O'NEILL: I'd say that their record at Thua, at Daq Son [phonetic spelling], at a lot of other places, pretty clearly indicate that's precisely what would happen. Obviously, in Thua, we've discovered, how many, 5,700 graves so far, at Daq Son four or five hundred.
MR. KERRY: The true fact of the matter is, Dick, that there's absolutely no guarantee that there would be a bloodbath. There's no guarantee that there wouldn't. One has to, obviously, conjecture on this. However, I think the arguments clearly indicate that there probably wouldn't be. |
Kerry was wrong.
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Greenhat wrote: | | Hmmm... in that debate, John Kerry claims his Commanding Officer was relieved. Anybody know anything about such a relief? |
Yes, that was another one that hit me!
Can anyone shed any light on this? First time I've ever come across such a claim, too!
And there was also Kerry's mention of his two weeks of agonizing over whether to leave Vietnam after his third PH, but I seem to recall it being four days after his third PH that his papers were signed, sealed and approved and he was "didi mau'd." Am I missing something in this issue?
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marine's Wife
PO3
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 267
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 8:59 am Post subject: subject |
|
|
Did any of you see Hanoi John at the Memorial services,where he stuck his beak and chin in the face of a Mother who had lost her son in Iraq,and started telling her what a great job he WILL do getting us out of THERE? NO SHAME,NO COMPASSION. It's all about him!
If that had been my child I would have punched him right in the mouth. I despise that creep more every day! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The bandit
Commander
Joined: 15 May 2004
Posts: 349
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Greenhat wrote: | | Hmmm... in that debate, John Kerry claims his Commanding Officer was relieved. Anybody know anything about such a relief? |
The O'Neil debate? I missed that, can you cut-paste the remark? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hist/student
Lieutenant
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 243
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
retracted
Last edited by hist/student on Sat Jul 24, 2004 3:03 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | MR. KERRY: Well, I hardly think the second really merits that much discussion – I'm not sure – that much discussion or consideration.
The fact of the matter is that the members of Coastal Division 11 and Coastal Division 13 when I was in Vietnam were fighting the policy very, very hard, to the point that many of the members were refusing to carry out orders on some of their missions; to the point where the crews started to in fact mutiny, say, "I would not go back on the rivers again;" the point where my commanding officer was relieved of duty because he pressed our objections to what we were doing with the captain in command of the entire operation.
MR. CAVETT: The man above you was relieved of duty?
MR. KERRY: That is correct. The man above me was finally relieved of duty. |
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The bandit
Commander
Joined: 15 May 2004
Posts: 349
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Greenhat wrote: | | Quote: | MR. KERRY: Well, I hardly think the second really merits that much discussion – I'm not sure – that much discussion or consideration.
The fact of the matter is that the members of Coastal Division 11 and Coastal Division 13 when I was in Vietnam were fighting the policy very, very hard, to the point that many of the members were refusing to carry out orders on some of their missions; to the point where the crews started to in fact mutiny, say, "I would not go back on the rivers again;" the point where my commanding officer was relieved of duty because he pressed our objections to what we were doing with the captain in command of the entire operation.
MR. CAVETT: The man above you was relieved of duty?
MR. KERRY: That is correct. The man above me was finally relieved of duty. |
|
Thanks a bunch Greenhat.
Tough to say who he is talking about since he jumped from one div. to another as follows:
November 17, 1968 - Coastal Division 14, Cam Ranh Bay, South Vietnam.
December 6, 1968 – Coastal Division 11 at An Thoi on Phu Quoc Island
December 13, 1968 – Coastal Division 13, Cam Ranh Bay
He is aiming at either 11 or 13, but those would be Elliot or Hibbard. I'll see what I can dig up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fortdixlover
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 1476
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Greenhat wrote: | | Hmmm... in that debate, John Kerry claims his Commanding Officer was relieved. Anybody know anything about such a relief? |
I think he means, his commanding officer was relieved that Kerry was returning to the U.S. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fortdixlover
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 1476
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From the CNN article http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/01/kerry.ad/index.html :
Proof positive the dems just don't get it on matters of importance. They are Masters of the Absurd.
A Kerry spokesman dismissed the group's claim, noting the Swift Boat Veterans used an enlarged version of the same photo at a news conference announcing the anti-Kerry group's formation in early May. "Somehow they didn't call to ask if they could use John Kerry's image," Michael Meehan said. "When it was useful for their politics they show a big blowup."
A sarcastic aside:
Nyah nyah nyah nyha nyah - if I can't use your pictures then you can't use mine!
Now back to the real issue:
The issue is the vets not liking Kerry and not wanting him to use their pictures that imply they endorse him - the pictures of private citizens. Kerry is a public figure.
Kerry's reply implies that the issue is one party's use of other's pictures vs. another party's use of the first party's - a simpleminded argument that misses the point entirely.
So the SwiftVets are hypocrites and therefore because they used Kerry's picture, Kerry should be able to use theirs. What a spoiled-child, absurd, idiotic, irrelevant argument. And this is a candidate for president of the U.S.?
On a different but related plane of defective thinking:
The Few are the Same as the Whole
Example: Some Elbonians are animal rights activists. Some Elbonians wear fur coats. Therefore, Elbonians are hypocrites. |
|
| 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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
