Author Topic: It's Just Not Fair!!! (Read 7024 times)

kj714 · « **Reply #45 on:** February 12, 2004, 01:47:39 AM »

Is service in Vietnam really a criteria for voters today? The major thing I resent about this whole issue is that it takes away from the discussion of the problems TODAY. I really can't fault people for decisions 34 + years ago when they were very young men and women. Vietnam was a tragedy and it was a mistake, but it's been over a long time.

I'm not voting for a man because I expect him to rescue his men on a beach under fire or fly a jet over my hometown. I want to know how he is going to directly affect my life and my situation.
I would rather examine the man and the decisions he made in the relevant past. How do these things relate to today's problems of jobs running overseas, illegal immigration, social issues, shrinking resources, taxes, healthcare.

I'm glad we went after the terrorists in Afghanistan, I'm also glad we got Saddam Hussein out. Was it the right thing to do? Stay tuned - we'll find out in about 20 years. It is unfortunate that we had to rock the world boat in doing so, but some people stuck with us and some didn't. It wasn't all that surprising who picked what sides. It really makes a difference if it's in your own backyard as opposed to your neighbors. This "rocking the boat" thing has been happening now for the last 100 and something years starting with Teddy Roosevelt. It's going to keep happening too. It wasn't in the world's collective best interest to invade Iraq, it was in ours and our truly close allies. Yeah, it's about two things; securing the worlds primary resource for oil & trying to plant seeds of democracy in the middle of an impoverished and angry people so that things might improve for them and spread to the regions around them, which would presumably benefit us. Success in either area would be big wins for us.

Another side note here, people who "opt out" of voting, by doing so they set aside one of the greatest gifts this country has to offer them and make themselves irrelevant in the process. That truly baffles me.

guttboy · « **Reply #46 on:** February 12, 2004, 02:09:19 AM »

KJ174,

Couldn't have put it better myself...well written.

Sixpence · « **Reply #47 on:** February 12, 2004, 04:41:42 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Wow you just slapped the hundreds of thousands of americans who defended and served this country in the guard and the reserves....

No, just the ones who were getting paid to be there and were not.

Quote

Wow, thats amazing what people will do out of political fanaticism.[/B]

Yeah, you should read your own posts.

Quote

Bush flew F102 interceptors, at the time they were one of the principal air defense assets tasked with defending the USA from bomber attack, which was a real issue at that difficult time of the cold war. [/B]

That's a nice spin. But the truth is those bombers would be intercepted long before they got near the country. He had a nice little gig, don't let political fanaticism fool you.

Quote

You know what I'm happy that lunatic Dean is finished, but this Kerry guy is turning out to be just as bad - and likey worse when it comes to honesty....[/B]

So when you look up the word honesty, there is a picture of Bush?

Look, I live in Ma. I've seen Kerry in action. I'm not impressed with him politically. This is the guy who used taxpayers money to move a firehydrant from the front of his house to in front of his neighbors house so he could have a parking spot(I can't verify this, but i've heard it several times).

But i'll never question his thoughts or actions involving vietnam. He served there, he lived all those horror stories you've heard. Maybe if you saw what he did, you may have protested too. I have a soft spot for vietnam vets, and no matter what they think about the war, I always respect their thoughts on it. I'll never question Kerry's service, or anyone who served over there. I never want to see what they saw. I hope no one ever sees that again.

Honestly, I don't think a regime change is a good thing at this point. I would like to see Bush resolve a few things he started first. We stood behind him when he made his decisions, I would like him to have the chance to finish it. It's only four more years, and the situation needs time, i'm willing to give him those four years. I have other issues, but I would like to see Iraq and OBL(edit) resolved first.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #48 on:** February 12, 2004, 05:20:02 AM »

So the whole national gaard syatem of air defense was invented so people could dodge Vietnam.

There really was no soviet threat, right? You're kidding?

I dont think anyone has any serios objections to kerry's war service. If one was nitpicking you could say he goot out early on a few minor wounds and his silver star was kinda cheap but that thats threading thinly and is disrectful because he did risk his life like so many others...

However his postwar congrsssional record is more telling about who he is...

As for his honesty how can a guy who voted to gut spending or completlety cut some 30 major weapons programs (M1 Abrams, F15, F16, F22, Apache, Bradley etc) now campaign as a national security candidate"? As one who voted to cut CIA spending, how can he attack bush on intelligenmce weakness? As a man who faked throwing away his medals, how can he now laud his war hero status... Furthermore if he really was so disguisted with his experiences in Vietnam why is he so quivk to play up on the waer hero image? Imagine how many nazi soldiers won elections in post war germany by touting their participation in the war? I mean if the war was so wrong and US soldiers were such barbarians as Kerry testifided to in fron of congress, wouldnt you throw away your medals? Or would you fake throwing them away, and keepo them safe to mount in your senate office later on and use in a presidential election?

The guy is chronically dishonest, I love his newfound religion againt corporate special intrests after 19 years of being the biggest recipint of such funds in congress... Gotta love him... Yep he's the real deal alright....

As you alluded to yourself the guy is a degenerate selfish opportunistic scumbag...

I see nothing to be gained by letting him in the white house - his personal relent political record is awful...

Eagler · « **Reply #49 on:** February 12, 2004, 05:49:59 AM »

wow

guess if Dole would have played up his gimp arm against klintons visits to russia, we would not even be having this thread ..

handsomehunkcrats = smear tactics as they can not stand on the issues or once explained everyone not on welfare would think them mad..

Tumor · « **Reply #50 on:** February 12, 2004, 07:02:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
WOW! A REAL PHOTO! Wtg Mudslinger!

Edit: It is really astonishing how the Büzhists fail to realise that photos like this actually make Kerry more favourable to the Libs and Europeans.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Westy · « **Reply #51 on:** February 12, 2004, 08:22:16 AM »

Late reply to Gunslinger.

"vietnam veterans against the war" You'll find they are very co-mingled with many communist movements at the time"....."Under Kerry's leadership, VVAW members mocked the uniform of United States soldiers by wearing tattered fatigues marked with pro-communist graffiti. They dishonored America by marching in demonstrations under the flag of the Viet Cong enemy."

FWIW I personally could care less who was or is a Communist. Same as I do for people who like to label themselves liberal, conservative, Democrat or Republican. And I certainly understand why the thousands of anti-war protesters did what they felt they needed to do. (I find rehensible and unforgivable the spitting on returning vets at airports or Fonda's visit to N Vietnam). But to even alude to Kerry being behind all thof ier public displays of dissent(sp?) is a reach only a script writer in Hollywood could make.

"He reported to Congress that U.S. soldiers had "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam."

Why he recanted I have no idea. I believe it had to do with the credibility of the sources at the time. Because ALL of that did occur as I read of them in many of the biographies and books I've read written by Vietnam vets. It's not as if he had bad info on WMD which he hyped up to Congress or the UN for supporting a US/UK first-strike attack on a soveriegn nation.

Westy · « **Reply #52 on:** February 12, 2004, 08:27:56 AM »

"However his postwar congrsssional record is more telling about who he is... "

Absolutely. I'm not voting for Bush (didn't last time) and I'm not voting for Kerry either. I hate Bush and I dislike Kerry. Kerry voted for empowering Bush to attack Iraq and Kerry also voted for the Patriot Acts. While I can understand the voting to empower Bush in light of the times and the B.S. that was put befoire Congress I can't fathom voting for someone who thought the Patriot Acts were necessary.

If they, Bush and Kerry, are the best this country has to offer from the two major political parties (and the choices were just as bad last election) then this country is in for a world of hurt and for a loooong time to come.

guttboy · « **Reply #53 on:** February 12, 2004, 08:47:54 AM »

Sixpence,

Have you ever served in the military?

Sixpence · « **Reply #54 on:** February 12, 2004, 01:04:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by guttboy
Sixpence,

Have you ever served in the military?

Negative.

Rino · « **Reply #55 on:** February 12, 2004, 02:08:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sixpence
Negative.

Well now, THERE'S a shocker.
By the by, you don't get to pick and choose the aircraft
you will fly after fighter training, you get sent to a unit. The
F-102 was not needed in Vietnam, the F-100, 105 most
certainly were..luck of the draw.

Rino

Sixpence · « **Reply #56 on:** February 12, 2004, 02:10:20 PM »

Sorry, didn't know you had to be in the military to post here.

Kieran · « **Reply #57 on:** February 12, 2004, 02:18:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rino
Well now, THERE'S a shocker.
By the by, you don't get to pick and choose the aircraft
you will fly after fighter training, you get sent to a unit. The
F-102 was not needed in Vietnam, the F-100, 105 most
certainly were..luck of the draw.

Rino

That's not the whole story, you know... National Guard units typically were given second-tier aircraft, meaning they were to be used only in defense of the homeland. Frontline fighters were, well, on the frontline. Bush in effect chose his ride by applying for the National Guard and flight training. He would have known (in all likelihood) what type of plane he would be flying. Even more so if he was able to secure a specific assignment through request.

So if your argument is that Bush did not get sent to Viet Nam because he happened to be assigned to 102's, well, you're wrong.

Toad · « **Reply #58 on:** February 12, 2004, 03:04:58 PM »

You get hired by the Guard unit before they send you to UPT. Each Guard Unit gets so many slots at UPT per year. (It has varied through the years.) You "belong" to that Guard unit if they use "their" training slot to put you through UPT.

So Bush knew he was coming back to the F-102 squadron at Ellington.

However, the underlying idea that "Guard guys did not really serve" is just the most incredible horse exhaust I've heard around here in a while.

ALL those Guard jobs that were available during the VN years and all the Guard jobs that are available now exist because the governement/military feels they are necessary. They don't just create units for no reason at all.

That F-102 unit had a valid Air Defense mission based on what the military felt was needed at the time. Anyone that says they didn't is just showing his/her ignorance.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #59 on:** February 12, 2004, 03:14:25 PM »

Never mind the fact that ANG pilots (and entire ANG F-102 squadrons, including one from the very 147th FIG that Bush served in) were called up to serve tours in Vietnam, and were an important part of NORAD which was a very serious mission in those days. Even in non-combat or training flying, it was still a very dangerous job. Per Tom Wolfe (The Right Stuff)

Quote

Being a fighter pilot -- for that matter, simply taking off in a single-engine jet fighter of the Century series, such as an F-102, or any of the military's other marvelous bricks with fins on them -- presented a man, on a perfectly sunny day, with more ways to get himself killed than his wife and children could imagine in their wildest fears.

The ignorance of some on this board, in the media, and in the DNC, is absolutely staggering.