Originally posted by Maverick
No one can confirm or deny that Kerry recanted his testimony??? 
I asked as a serious question not as a joke.
He never recanted the content of his testimony, just the tone he used. I belive he said that the testimony came from an angry young man and may have included that his some of his comments were 'over the top'.
Whatever he said it is not true that he recanted his testimony, remember, the bulk of his testimony related to actions of other soldiers, many of them highly decorated and honorably discharged, as told to him by the participants...a fact that the new SBVFT add convienently edits out of their new add.
I may have some of the wording he used wrong, but he still stands by his original testimony because it was true. Not all committed these acts but, speaking from personal experience, I KNOW that these things happened. Ask any groundpounder that served in Nam and I'll bet that 70% of those who saw combat had seen some of our soldiers displaying ears as trophys. Razing villages and destroying food supplys of suspected enemy sympathizers was common and was often directed from command not in the field. Torture of prisioners was usualy carried out by CIA types but in some cases where info was immediaty needed some in the field took it upon themselves to extract it by whatever means they had.
This is what war does, sometimes the desensitation that helps a soldier do his job wears off. The reality of the human cost of war can be an overpowering force and, IMO, John Kerry is of the type that takes action when he sees something wrong
