Draft-dodger Clinton

[whitehall]

Whatever Clinton was, he exposed the hypocrisy of the left. Look at the way the left treated Bush's National Guard service and then look at the way the left covered up Clinton's actual draft dodging. Credible allegations of 1st degree rape by Bubba Bill were ignored because the statute of limitations expired but look at what they are trying to do with 30 year allegations of harassment by Herman Cain. The Bimbo Eruption Squad was a big joke to democrats but it was designed to ruin any woman that democrats knew would come forward about relationships with Clinton. Imagine the president of the United States playing footsie with a babe barely older than his daughter while his family slept upstairs. The man was an embarasment to himself, his family and his Country and the left still takes time to prop up his fake legacy.

 

[kiwiman127]

I have worked with our veterans. Most who where 'in country' will tell you that they are 'functional but not OK.' I am sure there must be some combat veterans who came through it mentally OK, but there are many, many who have never been able to hold a job due to their PTSD, and can barely make it financially from one day to the next.

Yes, I realize we elected Eisenhower who was a WWII general. But in all, and I have cared for WWII veterans as well, the WWII vets managed to manage their lives much better than they Vietnam vets did.

Now, if this offends any of you on here who are Vietnam war combat vets, I apologize, but I would be willing to bet that many of you will agree with me. I honestly don't see how a Vietnam war combat vet with PTSD to the extent most have it would have veen able to be president.

Not offended at all here, Sunshine. PTSD didn't get all of us, but it sure has been a problem for a lot of us. Now, I can't think of any reason that Vietnam combat vets would have a much higher incidence of PTSD than their WW II counterparts, but I do think that WWII vets were less likely to have a label pinned on whatever emotional problems they had, and had a much larger pool of fellow soldiers who had shared their experiences in combat. That makes for a better support network, IMO. There are some other differences as well; they were perceived differently when they came home, and unlike most Vietnam combat vets, had a considerable time out of actual combat to "decompress" before they came home. Both of those things probably helped in their readjustment. If memory serves, the average age for WW II combat vets was around 26, as compared to about 22 for their Vietnam counterparts. That's not a lot of difference, but it may have been just enough added maturity to enable many of them to process the emotional trauma of combat more easily.

In essence, what I think from conversations with combat vets from both wars, is that, as a group, the WW II vets developed better coping skills sooner. They aren't undamaged, emotionally (I doubt very many of those who have experienced extensive combat in ANY war are), but their lives seem to have been less disrupted by the problems they do have.

With all that said, I think it might be a bit unfair to suggest that MOST Vietnam combat vets are seriously unstable (that may not be the case with those you see in a clinical setting, of course). I believe the majority of us have managed to work our way back to a relatively normal life, though that journey has been a lot more difficult for some than for others. Even some of us who came back with fairly severe PTSD have managed to lead successful civilian lives in spite of it. Are we uncomfortable, sometimes? Of course. Do we let it control our lives? No, because we have learned we don't have to, much as our WW II counterparts did.

Regarding PTSD, War War II, Vietnam and Iraq.
I've read a couple of articles regarding the increased mental health issues per-veteran from those three wars. The biggest contributing factor is, WWII was a war with lines and for the most part followed the protocols of war. In the case of Vietnam and Iraq, there we no lines. You didn't know who your enemey was and the protocol of war wasn't remotely followed. This put much more stress on those in Veitnam and Iraq, at any time and anywhere, anyone could try to kill you. That's the big difference between the WWI and the two non-conventional wars in Vietnam and Iraq.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

could you be uglier?

nah...

fdr,,, had polio, i'm sure you'll forgive him
truman ... served
kennedy... served
johnson... served
clinton ... had student deferment (yeah, how horrible... a rhodes scholar)

gore... served
kerry... war hero.

but you don't call chickenhawk cheney a draft dodger for his FIVE deferments.

i particularly love how you make a draft dodger (shrub) into a hero and a hero (kerry) into a goat.

and it's ok that baby bush lost his flight certification for not getting a medical exam and ran off to work on his daddy's friend's political campaign. i have no problem with his daddy keeping him out of vietnam by getting him into the guard, but try not pretending he actually served in the sense you mean.

thanks for proving what lying scum rightwingnuts are.

And Jimmy Carter was in the military – the right are indeed lying scum, and ignorant as well.

Otherwise, James Buchanan may have done something wrong, how about a thread about him?

 

[Si modo]

his advisors said that was a bigger is sue in the 92 prez campaighn than the womaniziijng

make a joke about " I dondmt inhale"

I think it's just normal for Democrat Presidents....

Clinton - draft dodger (and all around scum)
Obama - Never spent a day in any branch of the military.

But they're ok to be Commander of our Armed forces!

Hell, Kerry ran for president, and should have been tried for treason for some of his acts during the Viet Nam war!

And i think Obama is having fun with his assassination games! I think he thinks it actually IS a game! How many bad guys can he eliminate before he gets voted out of office!!??!!

could you be uglier?

nah...

fdr,,, had polio, i'm sure you'll forgive him
truman ... served
kennedy... served
johnson... served
clinton ... had student deferment (yeah, how horrible... a rhodes scholar)

gore... served
kerry... war hero.

but you don't call chickenhawk cheney a draft dodger for his FIVE deferments.

i particularly love how you make a draft dodger (shrub) into a hero and a hero (kerry) into a goat.

and it's ok that baby bush lost his flight certification for not getting a medical exam and ran off to work on his daddy's friend's political campaign. i have no problem with his daddy keeping him out of vietnam by getting him into the guard, but try not pretending he actually served in the sense you mean.

thanks for proving what lying scum rightwingnuts are.

Then I reverse my earlier post.

If Bush is a draft dodger, so is Clinton.



But we all know that neither is true. It's one of the most idiotic partisan views, ever. Congrats, ignorable OP and those who played into it!

 

[Sunshine]

I have worked with our veterans. Most who where 'in country' will tell you that they are 'functional but not OK.' I am sure there must be some combat veterans who came through it mentally OK, but there are many, many who have never been able to hold a job due to their PTSD, and can barely make it financially from one day to the next.

Yes, I realize we elected Eisenhower who was a WWII general. But in all, and I have cared for WWII veterans as well, the WWII vets managed to manage their lives much better than they Vietnam vets did.

Now, if this offends any of you on here who are Vietnam war combat vets, I apologize, but I would be willing to bet that many of you will agree with me. I honestly don't see how a Vietnam war combat vet with PTSD to the extent most have it would have veen able to be president.

Not offended at all here, Sunshine. PTSD didn't get all of us, but it sure has been a problem for a lot of us. Now, I can't think of any reason that Vietnam combat vets would have a much higher incidence of PTSD than their WW II counterparts, but I do think that WWII vets were less likely to have a label pinned on whatever emotional problems they had, and had a much larger pool of fellow soldiers who had shared their experiences in combat. That makes for a better support network, IMO. There are some other differences as well; they were perceived differently when they came home, and unlike most Vietnam combat vets, had a considerable time out of actual combat to "decompress" before they came home. Both of those things probably helped in their readjustment. If memory serves, the average age for WW II combat vets was around 26, as compared to about 22 for their Vietnam counterparts. That's not a lot of difference, but it may have been just enough added maturity to enable many of them to process the emotional trauma of combat more easily.

In essence, what I think from conversations with combat vets from both wars, is that, as a group, the WW II vets developed better coping skills sooner. They aren't undamaged, emotionally (I doubt very many of those who have experienced extensive combat in ANY war are), but their lives seem to have been less disrupted by the problems they do have.

With all that said, I think it might be a bit unfair to suggest that MOST Vietnam combat vets are seriously unstable (that may not be the case with those you see in a clinical setting, of course). I believe the majority of us have managed to work our way back to a relatively normal life, though that journey has been a lot more difficult for some than for others. Even some of us who came back with fairly severe PTSD have managed to lead successful civilian lives in spite of it. Are we uncomfortable, sometimes? Of course. Do we let it control our lives? No, because we have learned we don't have to, much as our WW II counterparts did.

Of course I base my thoughts on the ones I have seen in clinical practice. If they aren't damaged they aren't going to be seeing me. There are other differences in the WWII and VN vets. WWII was a war we 'won', VN was a war we 'lost.' It is easier to be a winner than a loser. The each seem even to have their 'uniform.' The WWII vets are all pressed and spiffy an carry themselves with pride. The VN vets wear their mullets, leather clothes, and tats. They seem stuck in the 60, still angry and protesting. I can spot one or the other a block away.

Right now, as we speak the VA has expanded its criteria for VA pensions. There are so many who have gotten tot his stage of their lives, never been really able to hold down a job, have no retirement, haven't worked enough for SS, etc. and just can't make it. Many live out in the woods in little huts and only interact with society when they need supplies. The state of KY pays 'service reps' to help our veterans access their federal benefits. Some actually owe the government thousands of dollars, but have no way to pay it back. Those reps help them get that debt 'forgiven.'

The economy of this country is definitely a mess. But if everyone knew what I know about that particular demographic they would be shocked.

 

[Sunshine]

I have worked with our veterans. Most who where 'in country' will tell you that they are 'functional but not OK.' I am sure there must be some combat veterans who came through it mentally OK, but there are many, many who have never been able to hold a job due to their PTSD, and can barely make it financially from one day to the next.

Yes, I realize we elected Eisenhower who was a WWII general. But in all, and I have cared for WWII veterans as well, the WWII vets managed to manage their lives much better than they Vietnam vets did.

Now, if this offends any of you on here who are Vietnam war combat vets, I apologize, but I would be willing to bet that many of you will agree with me. I honestly don't see how a Vietnam war combat vet with PTSD to the extent most have it would have veen able to be president.

Not offended at all here, Sunshine. PTSD didn't get all of us, but it sure has been a problem for a lot of us. Now, I can't think of any reason that Vietnam combat vets would have a much higher incidence of PTSD than their WW II counterparts, but I do think that WWII vets were less likely to have a label pinned on whatever emotional problems they had, and had a much larger pool of fellow soldiers who had shared their experiences in combat. That makes for a better support network, IMO. There are some other differences as well; they were perceived differently when they came home, and unlike most Vietnam combat vets, had a considerable time out of actual combat to "decompress" before they came home. Both of those things probably helped in their readjustment. If memory serves, the average age for WW II combat vets was around 26, as compared to about 22 for their Vietnam counterparts. That's not a lot of difference, but it may have been just enough added maturity to enable many of them to process the emotional trauma of combat more easily.

In essence, what I think from conversations with combat vets from both wars, is that, as a group, the WW II vets developed better coping skills sooner. They aren't undamaged, emotionally (I doubt very many of those who have experienced extensive combat in ANY war are), but their lives seem to have been less disrupted by the problems they do have.

With all that said, I think it might be a bit unfair to suggest that MOST Vietnam combat vets are seriously unstable (that may not be the case with those you see in a clinical setting, of course). I believe the majority of us have managed to work our way back to a relatively normal life, though that journey has been a lot more difficult for some than for others. Even some of us who came back with fairly severe PTSD have managed to lead successful civilian lives in spite of it. Are we uncomfortable, sometimes? Of course. Do we let it control our lives? No, because we have learned we don't have to, much as our WW II counterparts did.

Regarding PTSD, War War II, Vietnam and Iraq.
I've read a couple of articles regarding the increased mental health issues per-veteran from those three wars. The biggest contributing factor is, WWII was a war with lines and for the most part followed the protocols of war. In the case of Vietnam and Iraq, there we no lines. You didn't know who your enemey was and the protocol of war wasn't remotely followed. This put much more stress on those in Veitnam and Iraq, at any time and anywhere, anyone could try to kill you. That's the big difference between the WWI and the two non-conventional wars in Vietnam and Iraq.

That may be one factor. I'm sure there is more to it than just that. Of course, I'm not a reductionist.

 

[Sunshine]

could you be uglier?

nah...

fdr,,, had polio, i'm sure you'll forgive him
truman ... served
kennedy... served
johnson... served
clinton ... had student deferment (yeah, how horrible... a rhodes scholar)

gore... served
kerry... war hero.

but you don't call chickenhawk cheney a draft dodger for his FIVE deferments.

i particularly love how you make a draft dodger (shrub) into a hero and a hero (kerry) into a goat.

and it's ok that baby bush lost his flight certification for not getting a medical exam and ran off to work on his daddy's friend's political campaign. i have no problem with his daddy keeping him out of vietnam by getting him into the guard, but try not pretending he actually served in the sense you mean.

thanks for proving what lying scum rightwingnuts are.

And Jimmy Carter was in the military – the right are indeed lying scum, and ignorant as well.
Otherwise, James Buchanan may have done something wrong, how about a thread about him?

So, tell us. How do you 'fervently' represent one of them should he/she come to you for help?

Isn't that what the Code of Professional Ethics says you are to do?

 

[9thIDdoc]

Lies of the Left
---------

QandO: The Fraud of the Winter Soldier


February 16, 2004

The Fraud of the Winter Soldier
Posted by McQ



Many statements have been made that because John Kerry participated in Viet Nam, he had earned the right to protest the war. I want to say an unequivocal “I agree”. But that being said, I’d agree that ANY American has that right. Dissent is critical to the maintenance of freedom and I’d not deny that right to anyone for any reason.

However, as with any right, there come responsibilities. One of the responsibilities incumbent upon any who dissent is to do so in a PRINCIPLED fashion. It is their right to dissent, but it is their duty to do so responsibly.

THAT is the crux of my problem with John Kerry’s dissent. For the most part it was based on fraud. His dissent was NOT based in truth. His dissent was not conducted responsibly. It was, in my opinion, based on mischaracterization, outright lies, and fraud.

[Much of what I’m going to quote here comes from an excellent book that I urge all to read concerning this specifically and Viet Nam and its veterans in general. The book is “Stolen Valor” by B.G. Burkett. I’ll append “[BG]” after those quotes so excerpted.]

Neil Sheehan, certainly not a proponent of the war in Viet Nam by any stretch, characterized what was going on at that time quite well. Sheehan destroyed the credibility of Mark Lane’s book “Conversations with Americans” by revealing most of the “veterans” who’s “atrocities” Lane quoted hadn’t been in combat or even in Vietnam in many cases :

”This kind of reasoning," Sheehan wrote, "amounts to a new McCarthyism, this time from the left. Any accusation, any innuendo, any rumor, is repeated and published as truth."[BG}

It was, however, Lane’s book which inspired the “Winter Solder investigation”. The major organizers of the so-called “investigation” staged in Detroit in 1971 included Jane Fonda, Dick Gregory, Phil Ochs, Graham Nash, David Crosby, Tom Hayden, Daniel Berrigan actor Donald Sutherland and activist lawyer and writer Mark Lane - the same guy who’d already been revealed as a fake. Also deeply involved in the organization of the event was the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) which included John Kerry who was on the VVAW Executive committee.




Kerry hooked up with an organization called Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW). Two events cooked up by this group went a long way toward cementing in the public mind the image of Vietnam as one big atrocity. The first of these was the January 31, 1971, "Winter Soldier Investigation," organized by "the usual suspects" among antiwar celebrities such as Jane Fonda, Dick Gregory, and Kennedy-assassination conspiracy theorist, Mark Lane. Here, individuals purporting to be Vietnam veterans told horrible stories of atrocities in Vietnam: using prisoners for target practice, throwing them out of helicopters, cutting off the ears of dead Viet Cong soldiers, burning villages, and gang-raping women as a matter of course.


To reveal the depth of dishonesty present, Al Hubbard, one of the founders of the VVAW and its Executive Secretary, claimed to be an Air Force pilot, wounded in Viet Nam. In fact, Hubbard was never an officer, never wounded and never in Viet Nam. VVAW members Elton Mazione, John Laboon, Eddie Swetz and Kenneth Van Lesser all claimed to have been a part of the Phoenix program in Viet Nam where they routinely killed children and removed body parts as a part of their duty. They were shown to have never been in the Phoenix program nor had they ever been in Viet Nam. And the list of more frauds later found within the organization is mind-boggling.

So this is the organization with which Kerry was associated when he used the “horrible stories” generated by Mark Lane and the VVAW’s “Winter Soldier investigation” as the basis of his Congressional “testimony” later that year, saying at one point:

I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.” [emphasis added]

Not content with this outright lie, he stated further on in his “testimony”:

”It is part and parcel of everything that we are trying as human beings to communicate to people in this country: the question of racism which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions; also the use of weapons, the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage in the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a continuation of this war, when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions, in the use of free-fire zones, harassment, interdiction fire, search-and-destroy missions, the bombings, the torture of prisoners, the killing of prisoners - accepted policy in many units in South Vietnam.”

This too is a complete and utter lie. For instance, to pretend that torturing or killing prisoners was an “accepted policy in many units in South Vietnam” is to DISHONOR those who served in Vietnam because it requires one to then believe that gross human rights violations were encouraged by the chain-of-command and therefore committed “routinely”,as a matter of policy, by our soldiers.

As Guenter Lewey pointed out in his book “America in Vietnam”,

"Yet these incidents either (as in the destruction of hamlets) did not violate the law of war or took place in breach of existing regulations," Lewy wrote. “Those responsible were tired and punished. In either case, they were not, as alleged, part of a 'criminal policy,'" [BG]

We’ve also since learned that John Kerry’s “impassioned” and “impromptu” testimony wasn’t even written by him and certainly, as he claimed, NOT ‘impromptu’.

And Kerry's emotional, from-the-heart speech had been carefully crafted by a speech writer for Robert Kennedy named Adam Walinsky, who also tutored him on how to present it.[BG]

But that didn’t stop Kerry from mischaracterizing it to Congress:

”I would simply like to speak in very general terms. I apologize if my statement is general because I received notification yesterday you would like to hear me and I am afraid because of the injunction I was up most of the night and haven’t had a great deal of time to prepare.”

So what about the famous “Winter Soldier investigation” which was the basis for Kerry’s testimony?

The same disrespect for the truth was in operation during the Winter Soldier hearings. After all the atrocities were dutifully taken down, the transcript was inserted into the Congressional Record by Sen. Mark O. Hatfield, who asked the commandant of the Marine Corps to investigate the many crimes, particularly those perpetrated by Marines.
"The results of this investigation, carried out by the Naval Investigative Service are interesting and revealing," said historian Guenter Lewy in his book America in Vietnam. His history of the war was one of the first to rely on previously classified documents in the National Archives. "Many of the veterans, although assured that they would not be questioned atrocities they might have committed personally, refused to be interviewed. One of the active members of the VVAW told investigators that the leadership had directed the entire membership not to cooperate with military authorizes.

One black Marine who testified at Winter Soldier did agree to talk with the investigators. Although he had claimed during the hearing that Vietnam was "one huge atrocity" and a "racist plot," he could provide no details of any actual crimes. Lewy said the question of atrocities had not occurred to the Marine until he left Vietnam. His testimony had been substantially "assisted" by a member of the Nation of Islam.

"But the most damaging finding consisted of the sworn statements of several veterans, corroborated by witnesses, that they had in fact not attended the hearing in Detroit," Lewy wrote, "One of them had never been to Detroit in his life." Fake "witnesses" had appropriated the names of real Vietnam veterans.
Lewy pointed out that incidents similar to those described at the Winter Soldier hearings did occur. "Yet these incidents either (as in the destruction of hamlets) did not violate the law of war or took place in breach of existing regulations," Lewy wrote. Those responsible were tired and punished.

"In either case, they were not, as alleged, part of a 'criminal policy,'" Lewy said. Despite the antiwar movement's contention that military policies protecting civilians in Vietnam were routinely ignored, Lewy said the rules of engagement were implemented and taken very seriously, although at times the rules were not communicated properly and the training was inadequate. That's what made the failure so notable. [BG]


Lewey’s findings?

"The VVAW's use of fake witnesses and the failure to cooperate with military authorities and to provide crucial details of the incidents further cast serious doubt on the professed desire to server the causes of justice and humanity." Lewy wrote. "It is more likely that this inquiry, like others earlier and later, had primarily political motives and goals.”[BG]

Although the “Winter Soldier investigations” were thoroughly discredited, they continued to be used to discredit the Vietnam era military, such as in a 1993 “Newsweek” story by Brownmiller about gang rape by soldiers. They also continue to be the basis for the myths and stereotypes which linger, even today, about Viet Nam veterans.

Bottom Line:

Was John Kerry entitled to protest the war in Viet Nam - Yes.

Was John Kerry’s dissent principled and responsible – NO

It was John Kerry’s responsibility to ensure his dissent was both principled and responsible. He instead participated in a fraud and a sham known as the “Winter Soldier investigation” and then compounded that by using the fraudulent ‘testimony’ from that event as the STATED basis of his testimony to Congress. He made no effort to determine the truth of what he testified to, or if he did, chose to ignore the results. He completely failed the test of 'responsible dissent'.

With his testimony he indicted an entire generation of soldiers as war criminals, committing war crimes “not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.”

 

[rightwinger]

John Kerry won a Silver Star a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts......How did you do Swiftboater?

snopes.com: John Kerry's Service Record

 

[jillian]

well, if mcQ the swiftboater says so....

 

[Trajan]

Usually I never even open a thread of this poster's, but Clinton did not dodge the draft.

Period.

STFU.

true, Fulbright pulled some strings for himbut no I would not classify him as a dodger so to speak, really, it was, legal.

 

[The Gadfly]

John Kerry won a Silver Star a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts......How did you do Swiftboater?

snopes.com: John Kerry's Service Record

Hold it, RW; just what entitles YOU to address that to a combat medic like Doc? As a combat grunt myself, I'll be damned if I am going to sit silent when you do that! Let me tell you something, CIVILIAN, YOU have absolutely NO standing to ask a combat medic to compare medals with John Kerry, or anyone else! You are talking about men we combat grunts (officers included) look up to, because a lot of us would not be alive, had they not risked their lives to save ours!

For that matter, I personally am not going to get into a medal-count measuring contest with Mr. Kerry or anyone else. I will say that I saw considerably more combat in thirteen months and seventeen days in-country than he did in three months, and that my superiors were never dissatisfied with my performance. The only pieces of hardware on that old uniform of mine that really mean a lot to me are that campaign ribbon, and that CIB. The rest (which ones are none of your business), only indicate I did my job, and are not a matter I discuss.

For the record, I have never questioned John Kerry's service in Vietnam. What I HAVE questioned is his conduct upon his return, conduct that reflects poorly on his personal character as an officer, reflects poorly on his uniform, and reflects poorly on his character as an individual! Stabbing your fellow vets in the back with false accusations of supposed "war crimes" that never occurred, and knowingly procuring false testimony as to same from men who WERE NOT EVEN THERE, is disgraceful and in my judgement, unbecoming of a fellow officer, no matter what medals he won in battle! Whatever else I have done or not done since my return from Vietnam, I have NEVER accused a fellow veteran of unlawful or reprehensible acts which he did not commit.

 

[rightwinger]

John Kerry won a Silver Star a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts......How did you do Swiftboater?

snopes.com: John Kerry's Service Record

Hold it, RW; just what entitles YOU to address that to a combat medic like Doc? As a combat grunt myself, I'll be damned if I am going to sit silent when you do that! Let me tell you something, CIVILIAN, YOU have absolutely NO standing to ask a combat medic to compare medals with John Kerry, or anyone else! You are talking about men we combat grunts (officers included) look up to, because a lot of us would not be alive, had they not risked their lives to save ours!

For that matter, I personally am not going to get into a medal-count measuring contest with Mr. Kerry or anyone else. I will say that I saw considerably more combat in thirteen months and seventeen days in-country than he did in three months, and that my superiors were never dissatisfied with my performance. The only pieces of hardware on that old uniform of mine that really mean a lot to me are that campaign ribbon, and that CIB. The rest (which ones are none of your business), only indicate I did my job, and are not a matter I discuss.

For the record, I have never questioned John Kerry's service in Vietnam. What I HAVE questioned is his conduct upon his return, conduct that reflects poorly on his personal character as an officer, reflects poorly on his uniform, and reflects poorly on his character as an individual! Stabbing your fellow vets in the back with false accusations of supposed "war crimes" that never occurred, and knowingly procuring false testimony as to same from men who WERE NOT EVEN THERE, is disgraceful and in my judgement, unbecoming of a fellow officer, no matter what medals he won in battle! Whatever else I have done or not done since my return from Vietnam, I have NEVER accused a fellow veteran of unlawful or reprehensible acts which he did not commit.

I don't give a shit

He wants to play the swift boat nonsense and question Kerrys cred....let him show his medals

Kerry went into combat when he could have easily pulled strings and gotten easy duty on a Destroyer. Kerry won a Silver Star and a Bronze Star. For the right to attack his Viet Nam service is pathetic partisanship

As a Combat vet, Kerry had every right to question our involvement in Viet Nam. History showed he was right

 

[The Gadfly]

John Kerry won a Silver Star a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts......How did you do Swiftboater?

snopes.com: John Kerry's Service Record

Hold it, RW; just what entitles YOU to address that to a combat medic like Doc? As a combat grunt myself, I'll be damned if I am going to sit silent when you do that! Let me tell you something, CIVILIAN, YOU have absolutely NO standing to ask a combat medic to compare medals with John Kerry, or anyone else! You are talking about men we combat grunts (officers included) look up to, because a lot of us would not be alive, had they not risked their lives to save ours!

For that matter, I personally am not going to get into a medal-count measuring contest with Mr. Kerry or anyone else. I will say that I saw considerably more combat in thirteen months and seventeen days in-country than he did in three months, and that my superiors were never dissatisfied with my performance. The only pieces of hardware on that old uniform of mine that really mean a lot to me are that campaign ribbon, and that CIB. The rest (which ones are none of your business), only indicate I did my job, and are not a matter I discuss.

For the record, I have never questioned John Kerry's service in Vietnam. What I HAVE questioned is his conduct upon his return, conduct that reflects poorly on his personal character as an officer, reflects poorly on his uniform, and reflects poorly on his character as an individual! Stabbing your fellow vets in the back with false accusations of supposed "war crimes" that never occurred, and knowingly procuring false testimony as to same from men who WERE NOT EVEN THERE, is disgraceful and in my judgement, unbecoming of a fellow officer, no matter what medals he won in battle! Whatever else I have done or not done since my return from Vietnam, I have NEVER accused a fellow veteran of unlawful or reprehensible acts which he did not commit.

I don't give a shit

He wants to play the swift boat nonsense and question Kerrys cred....let him show his medals

Kerry went into combat when he could have easily pulled strings and gotten easy duty on a Destroyer. Kerry won a Silver Star and a Bronze Star. For the right to attack his Viet Nam service is pathetic partisanship

As a Combat vet, Kerry had every right to question our involvement in Viet Nam. History showed he was right

He had the right to question it, sure, and I'm fine with that. What I am NOT fine with is his LYING about his fellow vets, and deliberately procuring false testimony about "war crimes" that NEVER HAPPENED!

As for the pulling strings part, A LOT of us who served there did not have to; hell, I was prior enlisted; I only had a month of reserve obligation left. I could have simply walked away; I took a commission instead, and went to Vietnam. Does that make EITHER of us a hero? Not in my book. You want heroes? Look at medics, like Doc; did you know a number of them were conscientious objectors, who wouldn't carry a gun? Do you have any idea how highly decorated a group they are? The medics I saw in action on my tour were some of the bravest men I saw in Vietnam, without exception. THOSE are heroes! Among the Vietnam grunts I know, if a combat medic is present, he drinks for free! That's what WE think of them!

P.S. And no, YOU don't give a shit, because it wasn't your ass being shot at, because you weren't there, and Vietnam is nothing but an abstraction and a political symbol for you! YOU don't give a shit, because you don't know the meaning of honor, or the officer ethos that says an officer's word is supposed to be good, and his conduct above reproach! YOU don't give a shit, because the only part of Vietnam that means a damn thing to you, is what you and your party can exploit for political gain! YOU don't give a shit, and you don't understand why I will argue all day with someone like U.S. or Sunni, and then defend him as a vet and a brother! YOU don't give a shit, which is the attitude I and every other Vietnam vet have been up against for forty damn years! YOU probably don't give a shit, about those 58, 274 names on the WALL either, except as a political statement, and for that, as far as I am concerned, you can go to hell!

 

[mskafka]

again, really?

Yah, concur. One got a student deferment, and the other joined the National Guard. During the Vietnam conflict, this was the way to stay out of Vietnam. One joined the National Guard before they were drafted. My father did so for that reason, and readily admits it.

 

[mskafka]

again, really?

Yah, concur. One got a student deferment, and the other joined the National Guard. During the Vietnam conflict, this was the way to stay out of Vietnam. One joined the National Guard before they were drafted. My father did so for that reason, and readily admits it.

That would be Clinton and Bush, respectively. Did so! Did not!

 

[Trajan]

again, really?

Yah, concur. One got a student deferment, and the other joined the National Guard. During the Vietnam conflict, this was the way to stay out of Vietnam. One joined the National Guard before they were drafted. My father did so for that reason, and readily admits it.

not exactly....he had help, aside from Fulbright too.

this rates low on my Outrago-meter, but lets not play coy.

 

[mskafka]

again, really?

Yah, concur. One got a student deferment, and the other joined the National Guard. During the Vietnam conflict, this was the way to stay out of Vietnam. One joined the National Guard before they were drafted. My father did so for that reason, and readily admits it.

not exactly....he had help, aside from Fulbright too.

this rates low on my Outrago-meter, but lets not play coy.

Who is the "he" who got help? Are you talking about Clinton or Bush?

 

[mskafka]

Both wanted to stay out of Vietnam, and I don't blame them. I wouldn't have wanted to go, either.

 

[Trajan]

Yah, concur. One got a student deferment, and the other joined the National Guard. During the Vietnam conflict, this was the way to stay out of Vietnam. One joined the National Guard before they were drafted. My father did so for that reason, and readily admits it.

not exactly....he had help, aside from Fulbright too.

this rates low on my Outrago-meter, but lets not play coy.

Who is the "he" who got help? Are you talking about Clinton or Bush?

I see you are well acquainted with the issue.....

what Fulbright do you suppose I am speaking of?