Veterans Should Politically Banish Kerry

[travisab1]

From: Paul Bunyan paulbunyan@sacoriver.net
Subject: Veterans Should Politically Banish Kerry

Veterans Should Politically Banish Kerry for Disgracing The Marine Corps Memorial
By Rick Erickson January 26, 2004

On the cover of "The New Soldier" by John Kerry and Vietnam Veterans Against The War, hippies clad in a mismatch of military uniforms are pictured mocking the legendary image of Marines raising the American flag atop Mount Suribachi in the 1945 battle for Iwo Jima. Today, the Iwo Jima image is a memorial statue that sits above Arlington National Cemetery and honors all Marines killed in action since 1775. It is one of the most recognized and visited sites in our Capitol City.

"The New Soldier" never made it on the reading list at our military academies. In the cover photo that ridicules the Marine Corps Memorial, one of Kerry's cronies is tugging on our flag, which is hung upside down as the ultimate symbol of sedition and treachery to all veterans who rallied behind our flag in battle. On the day of that shameful photograph and with its mass circulation on the cover of "The New Soldier", at least 6,821 Marines who died at Iwo Jima turned over in their graves.

Of all the reasons why John F. Kerry will not become President of the United States, the biggest reason has to be that, once he returned home from Vietnam, he betrayed his fellow servicemen who remained at war. Kerry not only allied with the likes of Hanoi Jane Fonda, but, before the United States Senate in 1971, Kerry went as far as to belittle the bravery of embattled troops by generalizing their every action in Vietnam as an atrocity.

No one questioned General George S. Patton, III, when he accused Kerry of treason in giving aid and comfort to the enemy, especially when it was revealed that North Vietnam incorporated Kerry's exploits into its communist propaganda machine. However, because of the prevalence of treason at the time and the monumental task of prosecuting Kerry and his proclaimed "revolutionaries," Kerry's actions went unpunished and the associated advances of communism went unhindered.

Fortunately, today's veterans and Americans who overwhelmingly support our armed forces tend to
disparage those who dishonor military service and then pretend to be capable of our country's highest office. This political reality afflicted Bill Clinton, whose anti-military past kept him from winning any more than forty-nine percent of the popular vote. No wonder Kerry's presidential campaign is doing its best to subvert his estrangement from veterans and service people in general.

The tact of Kerry for President looks a lot like Clinton-Gore's approach to deceiving voters that such an obvious liability is really the opposite. When Kerry marched in the Veteran's Day parade in Phoenix last year, in tow behind him were a few people carrying "Veterans for Kerry" placards. Some placard carriers looked like the ragtag types on the cover of The New Solider in that they were unshaven, wearing circa 1971 clothes and appeared disoriented.

The ongoing insult is that "Veterans for Kerry" is supposed to represent the veteran community's support of Kerry, when the reality is that very few veterans support him. Most veterans cannot forgive Kerry for Vietnam Veterans Against The War and its promotion of communism when we were fighting communists. As far as U.S. Marines are concerned, we ought to ensure that Kerry is forever banished from the White House for dishonoring our Memorial on the cover of "The New Soldier".

------------

Major Rick Erickson writes as Director of Americans for Military Readiness, a Washington, D.C. non-profit devoted to ensuring troop morale and combat preparedness. Rick is a veteran of infantry operations in Mogadishu, Somalia and serves regularly as a reservist Deputy Judge Advocate at NORAD/USNORTHCOM. An Arizona attorney, Rick also serves on Military Academy Review Boards for U.S. Senator Jon Kyl and U.S. Congressmen John Shadegg and Trent Franks. Send comments to media@readymilitary.com.

Is the WORLD really coming to an end or what?

Travis

[williams919]

Travis,
That leaves us BUSH and I thought I was the only one that didn't care that one NG Junior Officer didn't show for drills.
Son of a Gun
Times is changing
Kinda like that little feller with big ears that heard sucking sound a few years back. No one heard it then, and those are the ones that are gripeing about the jobs going South.
Funny thing happened on the way to work. I got my uniform out and happened to notice that the little tab inside the collar states "Hecho in Mexico" does that translate to Federal Uniforms being made in Mexico, almost a sucking sound like berets made in China.
Hell who am I to bitch at least I got something to cover my skinny a$$.
Just Love IT
Willie :a:

[travisab1]

Willie;
It won't be long before we see, This Atomic Bomb made in Iraq by disgruntled Iranian's.

This weapon made in Syria by Happy Bath Rejects.

That sucking sound was NAFTA El Big Ears.

At least the Mexican's down south of the border are learning English before they swim those muddy waters to Dear Ole' Texas.

Times are changing. So fast that we arn't going to have anyone to vote for this year. If everybody got impeached out of the White House, who'd take their place. Kerry's getting impeached before he can even get peaches.

Travis

[williams919]

Maybe we better sharpen out pencils, cause it may be the year of the write in ballot. Good gosh can you imagine! Not a stuck chad but, blame a tree from Vermont for electing the next president.
I kinda lean toward Bush but, if better qualifications would appear then I may just lean way over. Don't think that will happen this year though.
The democrats are doing so much back biteing amongst themselves, we may not have but one choice. Well I guess ole Rush could raise his head as a last resort. :) :) :)
Take care and God Bless
Willie

[reconeil]

First, let me say that given a choice for office of A Combat Decorated Veteran over one not,...I would usually pick the one having survived combat (MANY did not), since having proven his metal.

Regardless, regarding Kerry, some things just don't jive.

1. The Democrats put Kerry (MANY OTHERS also) in quite a hairy situation in Vietnam.

2. Returning home after fortunately surviving his ordeal, Kerry led protests against same Democrats, for their normalcy of perpetually deceiving The American Public. In his case, specifically Vietnam.

3. Lo and Behold and after all that, and since deciding to go the career and/or self-aggrandising political route,...he then embraced The Democrats so they might help him get ahead. I personally could never join those whom for political purposes only almost got me killed.

Therefore, and since I normally can only trust most politicos as far as I can throw them,...I must believe that Kerry can be trusted even less. Hey,...just my opinion, even though quite logical.

Neil :d: :b:

[MORTARDUDE]

Would you have rather Kerry came back, kept his mouth shut , and not protested ? .....Hard call....he should have picked better company and not lied about stuff..IMHO

Larry

[reconeil]

My answer is NO.

Still, Kerry afterwards embracing same despicable Democrats that he apparently before despised and protested vehemently against,...does seem a tad more self-serving, conniving and phoney than most politcos normally act. I'll give em that. He's got large ones.

Guess that just another career people patronizer figures that all Americans have bad memories, and that no one remembers how vehemently and loudly "He" protested against The DEMOCRAT War called: "Vietnam"?

But then, and since: "Politics makes for strange bed fellows", what can you expect? Hell, Kerry would probably be an Independent or Libertarian, if he thought either would further his political ends BETTER. I can't trust such a type.

Neil :d: :b:

[MORTARDUDE]

Rush Limbaugh made mince-meat of Kerry today...of course he is a big target. If you get a chance, listen to the first 45 mins or so, A classic show !!

Larry

[HARDCORE]

There are good and bad on all sides of most issues. Unfortunately, sometimes, it is hard to distinguish from the mix.

This election just may be one of those times? "HARD CALL!!" :cd:

VERITAS

[reconeil]

True enough my Friend. Still, rarely (if ever?) is: "VERITAS" on the "Bad" side of any issue. More so self/clique-serving perversions or BULL are predominant,...meant mostly to deceive and make even the most absurd of public lies or false accusations of political opponents acceptable, Naturally such wild-eyed, fanatical and repeatedly echoed antics are only against Republicans, since Democrats are self-annointedly morally superior, and TRULY CARE about ALL Americans. Yeah, sure,...and I'm a Liberal/Socialist/Democrat, The President of China, or the head of The ACLU. :D :D :D

Neil

P.S. HC, see you at the next Dem Rally. It should be good for a laugh and seeing whom other than Bush The Morally Superior Party of Clinton wishes to character assassinate from the lowly Party Of Lincoln. Hey,...maybe even their moral ghuru, moral advisor and strategic and military expert Clinton will be there? I could pick-up an autographed picture for Gimpy. Maybe even one of Monica, autographed by Bill?

[Gimpy]

already got one.............thanks anyway. :D :D :D :D

PS................this was NOT just the "democrats war"...it WAS Eisenhowers, Kennedys, Johnsons, Nixons and Fords WAR as well! Historical fact! Yeah, Johnson was sure as hell guilty of "escalting" the war.................But, Nixon was JUST as "guilty" as he with the "deception(s)" and "decisions" that led to many thousands of our brothers lives lost in that hell hole!

[reconeil]

Whatever you say,...even though questioning your: "Facts".

Regardless, and historically and/or according to The Press/Media, The DEMOCRATS got us into Vietnam, The DEMOCRATS BS'd everyone and escalated things in Vietnam (AND FOR QUITE SOME TIME),...and finally when given the chance to do so, The REPUBLICANS got-us-the-hell-out of Vietnam.

Kerry could've protested against Vietnam 24/7 until today. But the-bottom-line for Vietnam is that crafty Democrats got us in there, and Republicans and/or your nemesis got us out.

Still, and in fairness to The Democrats, after foolishly putting Americans under UN Control,..."They" finally did get our people out of Somalia on their own, and without any Republican help. It's too bad that all couldn't have gotten out alive.

No Spin Neil (just facts & realities) :cl:

[Gimpy]

"FACTS" indicate that those "folks" (republicans") who you say "got us out" of Vietnam were ACTUALLY the ones that got us INVOLVED in the first place..............Here's some "facts" for ya!

January 1955 - The first direct shipment of U.S. military aid to Saigon arrives. The U.S (under Eisenhower ). also offers to train the fledgling South Vietnam Army.

October 23, 1955 - Bao Dai is ousted from power, defeated by Prime Minister Diem in a U.S.-backed plebiscite which was rigged. Diem is advised on consolidating power by U.S. Air Force Col. Edward G. Lansdale, who is attached to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

October 26, 1955 - The Republic of South Vietnam is proclaimed with Diem as its first president. In America, President Eisenhower pledges his support for the new government and offers military aid.

Diem assigns most high level government positions to close friends and family members including his younger brother Ngo Dinh Nhu who will be his chief advisor. Diem's style of leadership, aloof and autocratic, will create future political problems for him despite the best efforts of his American advisors to popularize him via American-style political rallies and tours of the countryside.


January 1956 - Diem launches a brutal crackdown against Viet Minh suspects in the countryside. Those arrested are denied counsel and hauled before "security committees" with many suspects tortured or executed under the guise of 'shot while attempting escape.'

May 8-18 -1957- Diem pays a state visit to Washington where President Eisenhower labels him the "miracle man" of Asia and reaffirms U.S. commitment. "The cost of defending freedom, of defending America, must be paid in many forms and in many places...military as well as economic help is currently needed in Vietnam," Eisenhower states.

Diem's government, however, with its main focus on security, spends little on schools, medical care or other badly needed social services in the countryside. Communist guerrillas and propagandists in the countryside capitalize on this by making simple promises of land reform and a better standard of living to gain popular support among peasants.

October 1957 - Viet Minh guerrillas begin a widespread campaign of terror in South Vietnam including bombings and assassinations. By year's end, over 400 South Vietnamese officials are killed.

June 1958 - A coordinated command structure is formed by Communists in the Mekong Delta where 37 armed companies are being organized.

March 1959 - The armed revolution begins as Ho Chi Minh declares a People's War to unite all of Vietnam under his leadership. His Politburo now orders a changeover to an all-out military struggle. Thus begins the Second Indochina War.

July 8, 1959 - Two U.S. military advisors, Maj. Dale Buis and Sgt. Chester Ovnand, are killed by Viet Minh guerrillas at Bien Hoa, South Vietnam. They are the first American deaths in the Second Indochina War which Americans will come to know simply as The Vietnam War.

January 20, 1961- John Fitzgerald Kennedy is inaugurated as the 35th U.S. President and declares "...we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to insure the survival and the success of liberty." Privately, outgoing President Eisenhower tells him "I think you're going to have to send more troops..." to Southeast Asia

There was enough "blame" to go around in BOTH political parties for our fiasco in Vietnam!

:d:

[MORTARDUDE]

Excellent post Gimpy !! Excellent post !! I have decided to create a new position in our "aluminum-foil-beanie club". I am thinking Historian for you. You can have both jobs, until we recruit more members...

Razz :

Are you interested ? We can split the Secretary / Treasurer duties or have several Vice-Presidents as well.

James :

We would love to have you aboard. How about Artist-In-Residence ?

Gimpy :

I welcome your test for joining !!! It will be mostly used for Conservatives and Republicans !! LOL


If I ever get my own web site I may go nation-wide with this. It will combine the Paranormal and Vietnam Vets, a great combination...IMHO.

P.S. : As I have pointed out before, JFK came to his senses and realized the looming South East Asian War was a mistake and had signed the orders to pull out. After LBJ had him killed, he reversed the orders ( the memo to undo what JFK did was written BEFORE he was shot ), and we all know what happend over the next 12 years....

[39mto39g]

If he gets his parties nod, His record and all his war protest will come out. And veterans will see just what Kerry is made of.
Some may think its ok to protest a war while at war, I would say, send him off to N-Vietnam to live. Take Jane with ya.

Ron

[reconeil]

Good synopsis of The Late Fiftees and pre-war Vietnam days, and how even: "Ike" was sucked-into that; "Domino Theory". In fact, and given The Chain of Command and that: "Ike" was my Commander-In-Chief at the time, I still thought him a bit nuts for getting us involved between 2 dictatorial regimes in Southeast Asia.

Regardless, and think what you like or say what you like about: "Ike",...It was only after The Kennedy Johnson Team and Administration achieved total power and control over America, that the body bags started coming home and The VA Hospitals started to fill up.

Whatever Gimpy, you or no one could ever blame: "Ike" for the many thousands of body bags or hundreds of thousands wounded due Vietnam. The only blame for such must go exactly to whom and where such belongs. Such blame being towards Kennedy, Johnson and their Dem Lackies.

Oh by the way Oh Great Historian,...I would suggest that in the future you should tell the whole story. Not, just purposefully only the parts that you think makes your clique come out favorably. Most can see through that.

And besides,...blaming: "Ike" for Vietnam is about as absurd and lame as blaming the late Shah of Iran for all that currently alienates The Middle East Sickos against America. That too, just isn't the case.

Neil

[Gimpy]

"I would suggest that in the future you should tell the whole story. Not, just purposefully only the parts that you think makes your clique come out favorably. Most can see through that."......end quote! If you carefully examine your OWN previous post I believe you can see that it appears YOU are guilty of "that" more than I, oh "GREAT MISREPRESENTER"!

And I quote YOU!

Quote, "Regardless, regarding Kerry, some things just don't jive.

1. The Democrats put Kerry (MANY OTHERS also) in quite a hairy situation in Vietnam.

2. Returning home after fortunately surviving his ordeal, Kerry led protests against same Democrats, for their normalcy of perpetually deceiving The American Public. In his case, specifically Vietnam."

End quote!


All I was attempting to do was show that BOTH political partys SHARED the "BLAME" for allowing us to "get involved" in Vietnam.............YOU are the one attempting to put the "BLAME" squarely on the shoulders of the democrats only...........STILL!

And.............you're obviously continuing to have "selective" memory STILL!

You forgot about your GREAT & WONDERFUL "conservative" republican "criminal" of of all time...Richard Nixon...... who actually held the "title" of CIC of U.S. Armed Forces for a LONGER time period during the "carnage" in Vietnam while telling lie after lie for YEARS after he was elected how he would get us "out" of Vietnam "with HONOR"! YEAH..............SOME HONOR alright!

[reconeil]

Historically it has only been fairly recently that the longtime and perpetual minority party (ie. The Republicans) have gained some power and control in America. "Ike" was only a rarity way-back-when, and a fluke in about a 50 year span of totally Democrat control (The Executive and both Houses of Congress). So then,...and for about a 50 year period to blame anything on people (re. Republicans) whom weren't even permitted on IMPORTANT Committees back then,...just doesn't wash.

In fairness to Republicans now in power,...they quit differently permit Democrats or Leftists on IMPORTANT Committees,...even though I think doing so is a very big mistake for America. Dems are just too-damn foreign oriented and foreign patronising,...for my liking.

Regardless, both Democrat and Republican LORDLINESS turns me off. I lean more towards a United America, and much less the extremely political and/or never resolving anything America, that We have now. Politics is more dangerous to Amerca, than any terrorists could ever be. We might end-up being politically-corrected to death, if we don't watch it.

Neil

[reconeil]

I must admit that since being pretty-much Conservative and/or pro-America and Americans over all other nations and ethnicities all my life,...that lately I'm even very disappointed with President Bush.

Even though believing him the right man at the right place for this War on Terrorism, I believe he let the entire American Citizenry down, just as Clinton did by pandering to Criminally Illegal Aliens and/or possible mules, moles, smugglers and terrorist,...merely to better garner The Hispanic Vote.

It's truly getting hard distinguishing between conservatives and liberals anymore,...since both seem bent on giving the kitchen sink away, merely for the sake of garnering a few more votes than their competative lords might get.

Gimpy, if the continuing stupidity and arrogance of: "Politics as usual" in America goes on unabatted much longer,...don't believe that America as once intended by Our Forefathers will ever come to be: "For The People" ALSO. The bents and/or ruling cliques will just keep taking turns ruling and/or waltzing-us-around as "They" decree or see fit.

Neil

[travisab1]

Gimpy/Neil;
I've got an Idea. Let?s ban both parties and start a new party called, US Citizen's Party and have a Gila monster for the Mascot.
Put an enormous flying saucer on top of the Capitol and defy aliens illegal or otherwise to deny UFO?s exists.

Travis

[Gimpy]

we find another "point" of contention that is common ground for us BOTH.

As YOU stated, "Gimpy, if the continuing stupidity and arrogance of: "Politics as usual" in America goes on unabatted much longer,...don't believe that America as once intended by Our Forefathers will ever come to be: "For The People" ALSO. The bents and/or ruling cliques will just keep taking turns ruling and/or waltzing-us-around as "They" decree or see fit."...end quote!

I TOTALLY agree!.............WE have to change that......at the voting booths!

But, your "historical" perspective is somewhat in error. Even WHEN the democrats controlled "both" houses of Congress,... there WERE "members' from the opposition partry (Repubs) on those "important" committees you speak of.............it has ALWAYS been so......even today. The "important" committee selection process IS CONTROLLED by the "majority party" in the House or Senate....whichever the "commitee" is esablished therein, and each "committee will usually have a "majority" of members from "that" party with the Chairmanship of said committee going to a senior member of "that" majority party!

This, however changes nothing with respect to garnering up "blame" for the Vietnam "fiasco" for which we all (well some of us anyway) stiil carry the heartbreaks, physical and emotional wounds and scars that were allowed to happen, and were committed against US by B-O-T-H politcal partys and our nations presidents from E-A-C-H!

[reconeil]

Gotsta go along with Travis,...since: "...at the voting booths" apparently just doesn't cut-it anymore (if such ever did?). After all, 51% of a minority (re. The Electorate) always gives us Minority Rule in a country supposedly being a democracy governed by the majority rule of all the people. I personally don't care what minority rules. I'm a Free America whom actually shouldn't have RULERS to start with.

Maybe, if "They" ever make voting mandatory to retain citizenship,...we might truly end-up with a TRUE democracy and/or the fine concept of: "A Government of The People, By The People and For The People". Sounds good in text. So, why not actually try such out? I'm getting sick and tired of MINORITY (both ways) dictates and rule. We deserve better anyway.

Neil

[SuperScout]

Wonder how Kerry will explain his votes against:
M1A1 and M1A2 Abrams tank
M2/M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicles
Tomahawk cruise missiles
Funding for counter-terrorism programs
B1 and B2 bomber programs
etc.
etc.

[Gimpy]

the SAME way GEE-W has "explained" his mistake(s) about his "reasons" for the war in Iraq!

FAULTY INTELLIGENCE!

If it works for the Pres.....it oughta work for Kerry............huh?? :D

[SuperScout]

The President's decision as based partly on a wealth of information and intelligence, distilled from the respective intelligence services of the US, Germany, France, Russia, Britain and a few other sources. Add to this the admitted facts of WMD's or components of WMD as porvided by France, Germany and Russia, to mention a few, and logic starts, or should start to invade the decision-making process. For example, if it took our forces months to discover several late-model Iraqi MIG's buried out in the desert someplace, who's to make the definitive pronoucement that there are no WMD buried out there as well? Or, more likely, transported earlier to Syria?

Having said/written all that, was does that have to do with the fact that Kerry's votes would have substantially weakened our armed forces, our counter-terrorism efforts or our already weakened intelligence gathering capabilities? We still haven't recovered from the disasters of Standfield Turner and the Frank Church and how these two paragons of self-righteousness threw the CIA back twenty years. What was the faulty intelligence that caused Kerry to cast these debilitating votes?

[39mto39g]

I'll wait till he gets the Nod, and then we'll see what his back ground is made up off.

Ron

[Gimpy]

saying that there WAS "faulty information" regarding Kerrys decision making process.

What I said was ...............If the Pres. could use that arguement to "justify" his bogus reasons for taking the nation to WAR. Would it not then be OK for Kerry to use "bogus" reasons for his "decisions" as well?

Makes sense to me??

[SuperScout]

Did or did we not need a replacement for the slow, vulnerable and difficult to maintain M-60 series tanks?

Did or did we not need to produce a tank that was at least as good if not better than the Soviet T-72/T-80 series, so as to be able to compete on future battlefields, inproxy or in person?

Did or did we not need a replacement for the M113 so the grunts could keep up with the tankers' new machine?

Did or did we not need to build and launch an Aegis system to defense naval surface vessels?

Did or did we not need to build and acquire Tomahawk missles,if for no other reason so Clinton could launch them into innocent aspirin factories in Sudan?

Did or did we not need to acquire and maintain advanced bombers?

What faulty information did Kerry possess that caused him to vote repeatedly against the better interests of the armed forces? And if it has been demonstrated that he is so woefully ill-informed, on a repeated basis, what does that say about his qualifications to be a senator, much less anything else?

[Gimpy]

The "same" thing(s) it says about the "qualifications" of BUSH for president.................and I don't think you want to go there, now...do you??

Like YOU said... and I Quote"And if it has been demonstrated that he is so woefully ill-informed, on a repeated basis, what does that say about his qualifications to be a senator, much less anything else".

Kinda like GEE-W was with HIS WMDs' ...HUH???

Have a nice day :D :D

[travisab1]

SuperScout;
Do you remember the M4 Ford wrecker Tank or the M48A1 & A2's I remember when the M60's came out with the 459 B Wire being most positive. The M60 was the first, if I'm not mistaken, Diesel Tank that America made. You didn't have to worry about sticking a dipstick in the ceiling while working on it from a crankcase explosion.

I thought I'd throw that in. I may be wrong, it's been awhile.

Travis