Author Topic: Kerry meets the troops  (Read 2461 times)

Offline SaburoS

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2986
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #90 on: August 01, 2004, 11:12:28 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Do your own search. Or continue on as you are, that's your choice.


You made the statement, now back it up. If you decide not to then I'll take it that I'm right. Burden of proof is on the one making the statement of something that exists.
Seems you decided to make the search and found out that I was right.
Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth -- more than ruin -- more even than death.... Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. ... Bertrand Russell

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18207
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #91 on: August 01, 2004, 11:39:46 AM »
Looking at his Herman face and shaking his withered old man hand would kill just about anyone’s appetite

you'd think if someone was interested in meeting him, they'd go to him - not the other way around
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #92 on: August 01, 2004, 11:56:09 AM »
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline MrLars

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1447
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #93 on: August 01, 2004, 12:06:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Dago


Lets look at the congressional voting record of the man now saying we need a strong military:

1) In 1996 - Introduced Bill to slash Defense Department Funding by $6.5 Billion.

2) In 1995 - Voted to freeze Defense spending for 7 years, slashing over $34 billion from Defense.

3) Fiscal 1996 Budget Resolution - Defense Freeze. "Harkin, D-Iowa, amendment to freeze defense spending for the next seven years and transfer the $34.8 billion in savings to education and job training."



I'm snipping a bunch of stuff here for expedience since BoB starts soon today.

These talking points sure don't take into account that many of these cuts were offered by and voted for by the Republicans. Some bills actualy had deeper cuts than Kerry offered and were voted for the same day he made the offering.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2096127/

They should also have looked up some testimony by Dick Cheney, the first President Bush's secretary of defense (and now vice president), three days later, boasting of similar slashings before the Senate Armed Services Committee:

Overall, since I've been Secretary, we will have taken the five-year defense program down by well over $300 billion. That's the peace dividend. … And now we're adding to that another $50 billion … of so-called peace dividend.

Cheney proceeded to lay into the then-Democratically controlled Congress for refusing to cut more weapons systems.

Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. … You've directed me to buy more M-1s, F-14s, and F-16s—all great systems … but we have enough of them.

The Republican operatives might also have noticed Gen. Colin Powell, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at the same hearings, testifying about plans to cut Army divisions by one-third, Navy aircraft carriers by one-fifth, and active armed forces by half a million men and women, to say noting of "major reductions" in fighter wings and strategic bombers.

Granted, these reductions were made in the wake of the Soviet Union's dissolution and the Cold War's demise. But that's just the point: Proposed cuts must be examined in context. A vote against a particular weapons system doesn't necessarily indicate indifference toward national defense.

Looking at the weapons that the RNC says Kerry voted to cut, a good case could be made, certainly at the time, that some of them (the B-2 bomber and President Reagan's "Star Wars" missile-defense program) should have been cut. As for the others (the M-1 tank and the F-14, F-15, and F-16 fighter planes, among others), Kerry didn't really vote to cut them.

The claim about these votes was made in the Republican National Committee "Research Briefing" of Feb. 22. The report lists 13 weapons systems that Kerry voted to cut—the ones cited above, as well as Patriot air-defense missiles, Tomahawk cruise missiles, and AH64 Apache helicopters, among others.

It is instructive, however, to look at the footnotes. Almost all of them cite Kerry's vote on Senate bill S. 3189 (CQ Vote No. 273) on Oct. 15, 1990. Do a Google search, and you will learn that S. 3189 was the Fiscal Year 1991 Defense Appropriations Act, and CQ Vote No. 273 was a vote on the entire bill. There was no vote on those weapons systems specifically.

On a couple of the weapons, the RNC report cites H.R. 5803 and H.R. 2126. Look those up. They turn out to be votes on the House-Senate conference committee reports for the defense appropriations bills in October 1990 (the same year as S. 3189) and September 1995.

In other words, Kerry was one of 16 senators (including five Republicans) to vote against a defense appropriations bill 14 years ago. He was also one of an unspecified number of senators to vote against a conference report on a defense bill nine years ago. The RNC takes these facts and extrapolates from them that he voted against a dozen weapons systems that were in those bills. The Republicans could have claimed, with equal logic, that Kerry voted to abolish the entire U.S. armed forces, but that might have raised suspicions. Claiming that he opposed a list of specific weapons systems has an air of plausibility. On close examination, though, it reeks of rank dishonesty.

Another bit of dishonesty is RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie's claim, at a news conference today, that in 1995, Kerry voted to cut $1.5 billion from the intelligence budget. John Pike, who runs the invaluable globalsecurity.org Web site, told me what that cut was about: The Air Force's National Reconnaissance Office had appropriated that much money to operate a spy satellite that, as things turned out, it never launched. So the Senate passed an amendment rescinding the money—not to cancel a program, but to get a refund on a program that the NRO had canceled. Kerry voted for the amendment, as did a majority of his colleagues.

An examination of Kerry's real voting record during his 20 years in the Senate indicates that he did vote to restrict or cut certain weapons systems. From 1989-92, he supported amendments to halt production of the B-2 stealth bomber. (In 1992, George H.W. Bush halted it himself.) It is true that the B-2 came in handy during the recent war in Iraq—but for reasons having nothing to do with its original rationale.

The B-2 came into being as an airplane that would drop nuclear bombs on the Soviet Union. The program was very controversial at the time. It was extremely expensive. Its stealth technology had serious technical bugs. More to the point, a grand debate was raging in defense circles at the time over whether, in an age of intercontinental ballistic missiles and long-range cruise missiles, the United States needed any new bomber that would fly into the Soviet Union's heavily defended airspace. The debate was not just between hawks and doves; advocates and critics could be found among both.

In the latest war, B-2s—modified to carry conventional munitions—were among the planes that dropped smart bombs on Iraq. But that was like hopping in the Lincoln stretch limo to drop Grandma off at church. As for the other stealth plane used in both Iraq wars—the F-117, which was designed for non-nuclear missions—there is no indication that Kerry ever opposed it.

The RNC doesn't mention it, but Kerry also supported amendments to limit (but not kill) funding for President Reagan's fanciful (and eventually much-altered) "Star Wars" missile-defense system. Kerry sponsored amendments to ban tests of anti-satellite weapons, as long as the Soviet Union also refrained from testing. In retrospect, trying to limit the vulnerability of satellites was a very good idea since many of our smart bombs are guided to their targets by signals from satellites.

Kerry also voted for amendments to restrict the deployment of the MX missile (Reagan changed its deployment plan several times, and Bush finally stopped the program altogether) and to ban the production of nerve-gas weapons.

At the same time, in 1991, Kerry opposed an amendment to impose an arbitrary 2 percent cut in the military budget. In 1992, he opposed an amendment to cut Pentagon intelligence programs by $1 billion. In 1994, he voted against a motion to cut $30.5 billion from the defense budget over the next five years and to redistribute the money to programs for education and the disabled. That same year, he opposed an amendment to postpone construction of a new aircraft carrier. In 1996, he opposed a motion to cut six F-18 jet fighters from the budget. In 1999, he voted against a motion to terminate the Trident II missile. (Interestingly, the F-18 and Trident II are among the weapons systems that the RNC claims Kerry opposed.)

Are there votes in Kerry's 20-year record as a senator that might look embarrassing in retrospect? Probably. But these are not the ones.

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #94 on: August 01, 2004, 12:34:30 PM »
Quote
NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer

Asked what he has accomplished during his 19 years in the Senate, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry gives a lengthy answer but has a short list of laws that bear his name.

The Massachusetts senator is known for using his investigative powers to shine a light on problems and corruption, but not as someone steeped in the process of making bills into law.

Kerry has been the lead sponsor of eight bills that have become law. Two are related to his work on the Senate panel on oceans and fisheries -- a 1994 law to protect marine mammals from being taken during commercial fishing and a 1991 measure for the National Sea Grant College Program Act, which finances marine research.

In 1999, President Clinton signed his bill providing grants to support small businesses owned by women.
The rest of the laws he saw passed were ceremonial -- renaming a federal building, designating Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day, National POW/MIA Recognition Day and World Population Awareness Week in two separate years.


19 years, 8 bills, 3 of which actually did something.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Captain Virgil Hilts

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6128
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #95 on: August 01, 2004, 02:04:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by SaburoS
You made the statement, now back it up. If you decide not to then I'll take it that I'm right. Burden of proof is on the one making the statement of something that exists.
Seems you decided to make the search and found out that I was right.


No, I decided not to waste my time trying to convince you, I'm sure it isn't worth it. Take a look around, if you are interested in finding the truth. If you aren't, my holding your hand and leading you to it won't help. Simple enough for you?
"I haven't seen Berlin yet, from the ground or the air, and I plan on doing both, BEFORE the war is over."

SaVaGe


Offline Dago

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5324
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #96 on: August 01, 2004, 03:02:41 PM »
Lars, you provided a lot of typing, but really not much substance to counter kerrys poor record of supporting a strong military.   Fact is, he does have a very poor record of supporting the military.  Trying to counter one or two of the votes, or saying the Republicans didnt support one or two of the bills hardly changes kerrys overall record.  


dago
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, martini in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"

Offline demaw1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 652
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #97 on: August 01, 2004, 03:26:15 PM »
Straffo...I believe ya , language I am sure was the problem,I honestly cant imagine anyone saying our military have no guts.

SABUROS....just a couple points.
   I think you again jump at America a little to fast, Straffo early on call them cowards doesnt matter the content he did...There are still enough of us left in America that will react to that and not bash America first.

  Straffo has called me a few names,dont care they werent harmfull..lol not like borodas...still sofften up a little, we all have been calling each outer names since our sisters took our first bottle from us .Also it just isnt in here,but the world does it every day, day in day out .

   about selective memory: yes we had french help in the form of mercinaries...and yes after 2 years ben franklin with help from lafeeatte[please forgivespellingI have no idea but he was an amazing man] managed to send a french fleet..but,the fleet


stayed away from any fighting unless they found a british ship by itself goin home or coming in.Near the end of the war[no certain time] after washington crossed the delaware Lord Nelson said [forsure paraphasing]  We british will lose this war,not because they are mightier or braver than us ,but because I now know we are fighting a spiritual war and for the first time in Englands history God is on their side.He sent this message back to England 2 ways.The French captured 1 of the ships and read the dispatch.They waited untill they were sure of American victory before entering the war as they didnt want a war with England.Yes they picked the right time to come in,  but the war was near over anyway.This does not deminish what they did,just tells a little of the geo politics at the time.

Offline demaw1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 652
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #98 on: August 01, 2004, 03:55:19 PM »
212 re. just a number after u join...

   When you serve in the military your unit strives to become one,but you still are an individual.From the beginning that is what has made our military strong. One little example and thats all. I may say this wrong so any vets please correct me.

     Even the private at some time is taught to think for himself,in ww2 that was a huge strengh[all our wars I guess]
     On the whole if the ger/ ja. officers  [lower rank battlefield] were killed for all intents and purposes the battle was won. They just couldnt funuction on there own after that.

   It could and has happened many times thru history that a private has taken command when there was no one else and continued to victory. An ensign has taken command of ships and fought her well or saved it ,so we never became robots like most other armies..as far as I know britian , canada,austrilia,are three like this there are not many.

Offline VOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2313
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #99 on: August 01, 2004, 04:32:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by SaburoS
Your being in the Marines, how would you treat Kerry today if you met him? You're in uniform representing the US. Do you act the professional you were trained for and treat him with professional courtesy? Or do you let him have it and tell him how you really feel?


I would be polite to the letter of professional courtesy, but "warm" I wouldn't be. If he asked for my personal opinion on any matter, I'd give it to him..in a tactful way, of course.

Offline wulfie

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
      • http://www.twinkies.com/index.asp
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #100 on: August 01, 2004, 05:03:09 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by demaw1
Even the private at some time is taught to think for himself,in ww2 that was a huge strengh[all our wars I guess]
     On the whole if the ger/ ja. officers  [lower rank battlefield] were killed for all intents and purposes the battle was won. They just couldnt funuction on there own after that.


DeMaw1,

Actually 'initiative thru the ranks' was one of the advantages that Germany's armed forces had over their opponents in WW2. From the end of WW1 thru WW2 the German army was stressing 'be prepared to take control of the fight if your squad/platoon/company leader goes down' long before any other Nation's military was.

Mike/wulfie

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #101 on: August 01, 2004, 05:04:43 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by demaw1
Straffo...I believe ya , language I am sure was the problem,I honestly cant imagine anyone saying our military have no guts.

It was not my intent.
I overreacted/expressed my thought very badly and for this I apologise.

Quote
SABUROS....just a couple points.
   I think you again jump at America a little to fast, Straffo early on call them cowards doesnt matter the content he did...There are still enough of us left in America that will react to that and not bash America first.

(I don't undertand thuis part)
 
Quote

  Straffo has called me a few names,dont care they werent harmfull..lol not like borodas...still sofften up a little, we all have been calling each outer names since our sisters took our first bottle from us .Also it just isnt in here,but the world does it every day, day in day out . [/B]

You have a better memory than I :D

 
Quote
  about selective memory: yes we had french help in the form of mercinaries...and yes after 2 years ben franklin with help from lafeeatte[please forgivespellingI have no idea but he was an amazing man] managed to send a french fleet..but,the fleet  [/B]

True.
Had Lafayette no been to the "soon to be former colonie of England"(*) LouisXVI wouldn't have given any support to the American
 
Quote

stayed away from any fighting unless they found a british ship by itself goin home or coming in.Near the end of the war[no certain time] after washington crossed the delaware Lord Nelson said [forsure paraphasing]  We british will lose this war,not because they are mightier or braver than us ,but because I now know we are fighting a spiritual war and for the first time in Englands history God is on their side.He sent this message back to England 2 ways.The French captured 1 of the ships and read the dispatch.They waited untill they were sure of American victory before entering the war as they didnt want a war with England.Yes they picked the right time to come in,  but the war was near over anyway.This does not deminish what they did,just tells a little of the geo politics at the time. [/B]

Are you sure you citation of Neslon is genuine ?
Plus I thing it's oversimplified why the whole british fleet was not near the American coast ?

(*) what else can I use ? ,it was not anymore british colonies but not yet the USA ...

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #102 on: August 01, 2004, 05:47:44 PM »
OK, maybe I missed it while I scanning through the posts. I`ve seen 3 or 4 tape measures wore out and a lot of drivel. Unless I missed it, what I didn`t see was what Kerry was supposedly doing at the Wendys to begin with.
  Here`s the line of horse hockey as expalined by Mr. and Mrs. Bozo.
  According to them, on the day they got married ,they did not have enough money to eat at  one of the  finer establishments to celebrate their wedding , so they dined at Wendys. According to Kerry they have made this a family tradition and on their anniversary they go to Wendys to celebrate.
  Now what`s wrong with this picture?
  Does he really expect someone to buy this crock ?
  I mean, come on. Miss Ketchup and Tomatoe sauce worth millions, no make that billions, couldn`t  afford anything but Wendys?
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline demaw1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 652
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #103 on: August 01, 2004, 05:51:51 PM »
Wulfe....german army

    Can you give me a referance, not because i dont believe you ,but because I have never read that,   would like to study it. If needed I can give you some.  every military historian I read gave a different view ,of course ,I have only read American authors.There were singlar commanders like Gudariun that tried to instill this with some success but not on the whole. Also I you dont have any handy thats fine between work,family and projects dont have much time.

Offline FUNKED1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6866
      • http://soldatensender.blogspot.com/
Kerry meets the troops
« Reply #104 on: August 01, 2004, 05:54:38 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
of course it could go like this: ;)


Brilliant :)
If you get the chance, make sure the camera mics are close enough to pick up your words.  :)