John Kerry & the Republicans.....THE TRUTH!

[Gimpy]

Well...........it's time to set the "record " straight!

Before George W. Bush's political operatives started pounding on John Kerry for voting against certain weapons systems during his years in the Senate, they should have taken a look at this quotation:

"After completing 20 planes for which we have begun procurement, we will shut down further production of the B-2 bomber. We will cancel the small ICBM program. We will cease production of new warheads for our sea-based ballistic missiles. We will stop all new production of the Peacekeeper [MX] missile. And we will not purchase any more advanced cruise missiles. ? The reductions I have approved will save us an additional $50 billion over the next five years. By 1997 we will have cut defense by 30 percent since I took office."

The speaker was President George H.W. Bush, the current president's father, in his State of the Union address on Jan. 28, 1992.

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."

In the years under Cheney the budgets proposed and the final outcomes followed patterns similar to the FY 1990 budget experience. Early in 1991 the secretary unveiled a plan to reduce military strength by the mid-1990s to 1.6 million, compared to 2.2 million when he entered office . In his budget proposal for FY 1993, his last one, Cheney asked for termination of the B-2 program at 20 aircraft, cancellation of the Midgetman, and limitations on advanced cruise missile purchases to those already authorized.

When introducing this budget, Cheney complained that Congress had directed Defense to buy weapons it did not want, including the V-22, M-1 tanks, and F-14 and F-16 aircraft, and required it to maintain some unneeded reserve forces. His plan outlined about $50 billion less in budget authority over the next 5 years than the Bush administration had proposed in 1991.

Over Cheney's four years as secretary of defense, encompassing budgets for fiscal years 1990-93, DoD's total obligational authority in current dollars declined from $291.3 billion to $269.9 billion. Except for FY 1991, when the TOA budget increased by 1.7 percent, the Cheney budgets showed negative real growth: -2.9 percent in 1990, -9.8 percent in 1992, and -8.1 percent in 1993. During this same period total military personnel declined by 19.4 percent , from 2.202 million in FY 1989 to 1.776 million in FY 1993. The Army took the largest cut, from 770,000 to 572,000-25.8 percent of its strength. The Air Force declined by 22.3 percent, the Navy by 14 percent, and the Marines by 9.7 percent.

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."

And then, in the last election he (Cheney) had the unmitigated GALL to say, "?I do not presume to speak for the military, but I am now speaking to them,? Cheney said. ?To all of our men and women in uniform, and to their parents and families: Help is on the way!?, end quote! Man did THAT turn out to be a WHOPPER of a LIE! What a HYPOCITE!

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 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 to look at the footnotes however . 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.

In other words, Kerry was one of 16 senators (including five Republicans, you don't see the administration screaming about THEM though, DO YOU?)) 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 and complete dishonesty .

Another bit of dishonesty is RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie's claim, at a news conference recently, that in 1995, Kerry voted to cut $1.5 billion from the intelligence budget. John Pike, who runs the invaluable globalsecurity.org Web site, informs 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. HUH???) 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 aircraft 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 not the ones the republicans keep misleading us about!
######

Now, if you want to focus on something John Kerry said in 1971, that's fine. I said some things back then that I or you might not agree with now. But I would also point to something else John Kerry (and I when entering the Army) said earlier, back in the 60's when he joined the Navy: "I swear to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..." I am certain that he has remained steadfast and he will never waver from that oath. Neither will I.

I don't mind painful facts. But, I deeply resent selective memory and falsehood. I resent it even more when it comes from second stringers and bench sitters like George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, etc, etc,....... who never got in the game.

Everyone needs to also read the Book "Home to War, A history of the Vietnam Veterans Movement" by Gerald Nicosta, Corte Madera, Calif Crown Publisher, 2001, of which many have called it one of the best books of the Vietnam era.

Gerald Nicosia spent 12 years researching and writing his massive history, HOME TO WAR, a comprehensive, 33-year chronicle of Vietnam veteran activism, readjustment, and healing.

It has already garnered great praise, including starred reviews in PUBLISHERS WEEKLY and LIBRARY JOURNAL, which BTW, wrote:?The frequently heroic, more often tragic saga of the veterans who fought in the war and then fought against it is told in this gripping narrative, which takes hold of the reader with its haunting cover and doesn't let go for almost 700 pages.?

It has been called ?an epic, narrative history that chronicles, for the first time, the experience of America?s Vietnam veterans, who returned home to fight a different kind of war.?

As we all know, the 3.4 million Americans who served in Vietnam fought two wars: one on the other side of the world and one for the hearts and minds of their countrymen when they returned home. Based on 600 interviews and 12 years of research, HOME TO WAR is the definitive history of that second war.

HOME TO WAR paints a fresh picture of the American war heroes who were rejected by the nation in whose name they fought and by the government that sent them to risk life, limb, and spirit in Southeast Asia. It chronicles their heroic?and ultimately victorious? battle on the home front, from their role in the anti-war movement to their campaign for medical help and compensation for Agent Orange exposure and post-traumatic stress wounds.

And, as this book states...............John Kerry did "not" emcee the winter soldier investigation in Detroit. It was emceed by several Vietnam veterans leaders of the VVAW, includingScott Moore, Mike Oliver, and AL Hubbard. The veterans testifying were carefully screened by the VVAW, and no "imposters" have ever been uncovered.

It is true that Jane Fonda did fund the Winter Soldier Investigation, but she did not finance the VVAW in any of it's other activities. John Kerry was not one of the original founding members of VVAW in 1967.

Furthermore Sen. Kerry's reference to atrocities was a very small part of his landmark speech to the Senate Foreign Relations committee. Mainly he spoke of American troops who felt abandoned by their government, and of their "sense of anger and a sense of betrayal which no one has yet grasped". Anybody can read the speech themselves

Several versions of stories about Kerry throwing his medals back, at the Vow's Dewey Canyon Convention Demonstration at the Capitol in April 1971. Records of his speech indicate he was quite clear about throwing back the medals of two close friends who had asked him to do so, one of them was still in a VA hospital.
####


Below are some more reviews for the book, Home to War:

?Home to War is a superbly researched book that needed to be written. It sets forth in compelling detail a whole other dimension of America?s tragic war in Vietnam, which, until now, has never been completely captured.?

-General Harold G. Moore, author of We Were Soldiers Once?And Young ###

?Home to War is simply the best. Gerry Nicosia has written the definitive story of the deep sense of human and humane conscience among ordinary soldiers during an extraordinary time in American history. Read this book and discover why the epoch of our war in Vietnam still keenly reverberates from the kitchen tables and porches, newspapers and journals, as well as classrooms all across this country.?

-Larry Heinemann, author of PAC's Story
###

?Gerry Nicosia has an uncommon understanding of the struggle of veterans to give meaning to their war and a struggle, too, to redeem themselves. Home to War is a powerful history of our times.?

-Gloria Emerson, author of Winners and Losers
###

?Home to War is a fascinating account of the generation of young Americans whose lives were thrown into turmoil and put at risk by the Vietnam War, of their bravery under enemy fire over there and their bravery under political fire at home.?

-Senator Alan Cranston, Chair, Veterans? Affairs Committee
###

?Every Vietnam veteran should read this remarkable book. It?s a part of our history that a lot of us don?t know anything about, and it?s essential for an understanding of how the war finally came to an end and what happened to the soldiers who fought it.?

-Angelo J. ?Charlie? Liteky, awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for ?exceptional heroism? while serving with the 199th Light Infantry Brigade on December 6, 1967, in Bien Hoa Province, Republic of Vietnam. ###

?After war, we forget. We lose history. Home to War is about veterans of the war in Vietnam who take on the responsibility of remembering. They serve again by telling the consequences of war. Gerald Nicosia has written a history that we as a nation have not faced. This book is a must-read if we are to understand the America we have become.?

-Maxine Hong Kingston, author of The Woman Warrior
###

?Home to War is an extraordinary achievement of research and writing. Its eloquence and power will serve the cause of justice for veterans, but also give to all Americans a sobering lesson about war, peace, and broken promises. I hope it will be widely read.?

-Howard Zinn, author of A People?s History of the United States
###

Blurbs for Home to War -- Page 3?A quarter century after the Vietnam War ended, the story of the Vietnam Veterans? Movement remains compelling. In this captivating work by Gerry Nicosia, the voices and stories of these American veterans force us to confront the issues of the war and the question of why soldiers who came home to peace could find none. The sense of loss and waste that pervades Home to War is overwhelming.?

-Duong Van Mai Elliott, author of The Sacred Willow: Four Generations in the
Life of a Vietnamese Family ###

?Home to War describes the complex history of those Vietnam veterans who returned to America (long before the 58,000-plus names of those killed-in-action were etched on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial) with the sincere conviction that the war was both misdirected and poorly-led. Refusing to be silent about the things they had learned, this generation of veterans protested in ways both creative and destructive?and Nicosia portrays it all in a book that is well-researched, well-written and ultimately courageous.?

-Asa Baber, ?Men? columnist, Playboy Magazine ###

?Home to War captures America?s struggle to heal the wounds of a war too many?particularly those at the highest levels of our government?would have preferred to forget. From triple canopy jungles along the Ho Chi Minh trail and the waters of the Mekong Delta, to VA hospitals across the nation, heated debates in both chambers of Congress, and an incredible grassroots movement led by Vietnam veterans aiming to keep faith with their brothers and sisters in arms"Gerry Nicosia?s important new book ties together the many threads of a difficult period in our history every American should take the time to understand in its totality.? ?He for the first time puts together a history that has been an intimate part of the lives of thousands of us in the veterans? community over the past 30 years?makes a coherent whole of that journey toward healing and recognition, which otherwise would probably have been forgotten. Thanks to Gerald Nicosia, these people and events are now preserved and will be remembered. This book needs to be on every library shelf in America.?

-Colonel David H. Hackworth, author of About Face
####

I HAVE TO SAY THAT SINCE THOSE PROTESTS BY THE VIETNAM VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR WE HAVE WITNESSED BOTH POLITICAL PARTIES (I'M NOT AFAID TO SAY THAT!) ALLOW THE BENEFITS OF OUR VETERANS, MILITARY RETIREES, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY OUR TROOPS AND THEIR FAMILIES DETERIORATE. BOTH DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN CONGRESSES AND ADMINISTRATIONS ARE TO BLAIM FOR ALLOWING THIS TO HAPPEN, AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, FOR NOT TAKING NOTICE UNTIL WARTIME. HOWEVER, THIS LATEST REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION AND REPUBLICAN CONGRESS HAVE FAILED EVEN MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS POLITICIANS TO ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS AFTER MAKING PROMISE AFTER PROMISE TO CORRECT THE SHORTCOMINGS AND DISARAY IN THE VA SYSTEM. NOT TO MENTION THE OUTRAGEOUS TREATMENT OF OUR CURRENT ACTIVE DUTY TROOPS!

VIETNAM VETS ROLE IN THE VIETNAM ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT MAY BE OVER, BUT IT IS EVIDENT BY THE PRONOUNCEMENTS COMING OUT OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND ONE WHO LED THE VIETNAM VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR THAT OUR CAMPAIGN FOR MEDICAL HELP NOT ONLY FOR VETERANS AND THEIR DEPENDENTS, BUT FOR THE NATION AS WELL, COMPENSATION AND TREATMENT FOR ALL VETERANS WHO SUFFER AS A RESULT OF WAR, AND FAIR AND EQUITABLE TREATMENT OF THOSE WHO SERVE TODAY AND THEIR FAMILIES STILL GOES ON.

GETTING A VETERANS-VETERAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE IS ONLY A FIRST STEP. GIVING HIM A MANDATE IN THE CONGRESS WITH A GRASS ROOTS EFFORT TO FORCE THE CONGRESS TO PASS JOHN KERRY'S AGENDA IS WHERE THE RUBBER HITS THE ROAD. AND...............THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO BE DOING IN THESE NEXT FEW MONTHS!

HELPING THAT HAPPEN!

IT IS FAR PAST TIME FOR THE REPUBLICANS TO ....................GO!

[MORTARDUDE]

Gimpy :

Great post, analysis, and follow-up !!! You Da Man !!!

Larry

[SuperScout]

[Some of this is direct quotes, some editorial comment of my own, which will appear between the brackets.]

During his war protest days in the early 1970s, Democratic presidential front-runner John Kerry once denounced the United States of America as "the real criminal" in the Vietnam War. [Did he ever bother to read or examine or see who really invaded whom?]

In comments first reported by the New York Times 33 years ago, Kerry condemned the entire country as "criminal" [speak for yourself, Johnnie] during a 1971 demonstration on Wall Street, a few weeks after the trial of Lt. William Calley. "Guilty as Lieutenant Calley may have been of the actual act of murder, the verdict does not single out the real criminal ... the United States of America," railed the future Democratic presidential hopeful.
The damning comment was unearthed by the Baltimore Sun, which reprinted Kerry's outburst in its Saturday edition exactly as quoted above.

The Sun also revisited other anti-war comments by Kerry that have yet to receive significant exposure, including remarks Kerry uttered on NBC's "Meet the Press" a few weeks after the Wall Street protest.

"I committed the same kinds of atrocities as thousands of others," he told the network, "in that I shot in free-fire zones, fired .50-caliber machine bullets, used harass-and-interdiction fire, joined in search-and-destroy missions and burned villages." [Since when did these acts constitute an act of atrocity, per se? If he knew about, or witnessed this mass scene of war crimes, as he alleges, why didn't he have the moral fiber, intestinal fortitude, or simple cajones to report it? Is he just a gutless wonder, or a a lying grandstander?]

Though NBC has the Kerry interview on tape, it has so far declined to broadcast his revealing comments.
The Sun also obtained reactions from two of Kerry's Swift Boat mates in Vietnam, who told the paper they were deeply disturbed by his anti-war activities. Kerry crewman James Wasser said he was "absolutely upset" over his former commanding officer's claims that the U.S. committed wartime atrocities as a matter of course. Saying he recalled no such war crimes, Wasser said of Kerry, "I felt betrayed."

Shipmate Bill Zaladonis was also offended by Kerry's claims. "I didn't like the idea [of Kerry condemning his fellow servicemen]," he told the Sun. "I certainly didn't believe that all Vietnam veterans were baby-killing women rapers. Most people I know agree with me - they didn't see it."

[For the hundreds of Vietnam veterans that I know personally, and the thousands more that I know through cyber-greetings, I know of no such atrocities that Kerry speaks of, and am grossly and profoundly insulted by his grandstanding lies which are only designed to make himself look good. What he has committed is an unforgiveable sin. He had no proof then, and he has no honor now.]

[Gimpy]

of "unforgiveable sins" committed by THIS administration.............and for the hundreds and hundreds of Vietnam Vets that I personally know and have contact with via service organizations, VA hospital volunteer work, internet access and political action activities I can say for SURE that George Bushs' days are "numbered"!

In the face of the Bush Administration?s failures, it's obvious what kind of campaign the Bush attack machine (and its' surrogates) will run. They did it to John McCain in South Carolina in 2000. They did it to my friend Max Cleland in Georgia in 2002 and continue to berate him even today with the horrible, insensitive remarks by Ann Coulter as recently as last week when attempting to downplay Kerry's friendship with him!

Well, it?s not going to work in 2004 ? for a very simple reason. They?re extreme. We who support John Kerry are mainstream ? and we?re going to stand up and fight back.

While this administration wraps itself in the flag and beats the war drum upon it's chest, most of whom BTW never wore a uniform and/or avoided combat service, send our children in harms way, and BEHIND their backs scheme and manipulate ways to cut their benefits, their pay, inadequately equip them, and over extend them.

The republicans and their mouthpieces like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and others now say they want to campaign on national security......... BULLSHIT!..... But this is the same Administration that slashes health care for veterans, attempts to cut combat pay for our troops in the field, makes injured soldiers pay for their own hospital meals, and forces our men and women in Iraq to buy their own body armor. How is it that any veteran could justify this administrations actions?? John Kerry and those who support him are fighting for the mainstream value of a stronger America ? and for the ideal that the first duty of patriotism is to honor those who wear and have worn the uniform of the United States. Not DENY them the benefits, pay, equipment, health care and dependent care they deserve as the Bush administration has done!

[reconeil]

YOUR typically echoed character assassinations like: "The republicans and their mouthpieces like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and others say they want to campaign on national security....BULLSHIT!"............IS A DEAD GIVEAWAY.

In fact, such typical and adnauseamly echoed Democratic public defamations of character for financial and/or political reward,...are actually libellous.

Besides, do Americans want THOSE (re. Dems/Libs/Leftists) IN POWER whom just want to: "RECAPTURE(WOW!!!...a very exposing word) The White House"?
Wouldn't Americans be much wiser preferring THOSE (re. Republicans and/or: "The Party of Lincoln") IN POWER whom want to: "Protect The American People" ABOVE ALL ELSE?

The too,...who needs the likes of Kerry, Kennedy and such governing America, much the same as political-machinerun Massachusetts? America deserves much better.

Granted, New Jersey is in much the same boat and/or one of the highest taxed by politicos states in America (if not the highest taxed?). But, SO WHAT??? Why foolishly make the entire Nation suffer political-machinerun rule,...just so some ruling elite in straw hats can sing: "Happy Days Are Here Again". America deserves better than even a New Jersey type governance.

Want such type socialistic rule? Some career zealots and/or politicos should move to France, Germany or Russia,...or amongst those more like-minded and/or more people-control oriented.

Neil

[colmurph]

Gimpy....do you want to see America subserviant to a "One World Government" under the United Nations? If so...then vote for Kerry as that is what he and the rest of the Democratic Party heirarchy want. I for one DON"T want to live in a United States that has given up it's soverignty to another Government. To me, putting Kerry into the White House would be like re-writing history and having Benedict Arnold as our second president. Kerry was a traitor after Vietnam. If you read the boards over on SOCNET you will find that there are a lot of Vietnam Vets who have some serious questions about the validity of his "Silver Star" and the 3 Purple Hearts as well. Having read the circumstances of the action that got him the Silver Star I question his status as a "Hero".

[Gimpy]

I'll tell you like I tell everyone else. You're falling for the same propaganda and misinformation from the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Ann (nazi) Coulter, et al that will continue to try and warp and mislead folks into believing their happy horseshit!

And, I've got a "question" for YOU:

How is it that any veteran could justify this administrations actions??

This is the same Administration that schemes and manipulates its way to slashe health care for veterans, attempts to cut combat pay for our troops in the field, makes injured soldiers pay for their own hospital meals, and forces our men and women in Iraq to buy their own body armor. And have allowed the VA adjudication system to become so fouled up that it now takes more than THREE and one-half YEARS to get disability compensation case appeal heard by the Board of Veterans Appeals and some veterans are waiting up to a YEAR for treatment at VA hospitals and health centers????

And you tell ME that this is bringing "HONOR & INTEGRITY " back to the whitehouse??

Naw................I'll go with KERRY thank you very much!

[SuperScout]

Over the weekend, my bride and I helped stage a bon voyage party for son #2 prior to his deployment to Iraq later this week. One of the guests, and as it turned out, a fellow deployee, was a young captain, currently assigned as the S-2 of an aviation unit that will be stationed just north of where our lad will be. This captain had recently returned from Iraq, having been sent there on a pre-deployment recon for a TDY of 3-4 weeks. Naturally, I grilled him rather extensively about conditions, enemy situation, pre-positioned logistics, load plans, and everything else that was not classified. Of particular note was the issue of alleged lack of body armor. And contrary to all the tales of woe being spewed out by a media that has consistently been anti-military, his research revealed that there is no such shortage now, and that the only shortage existed for personnel in Kuwait, the jump off point for transit to Iraq. This shortage has long been erased, and every warrior sent northward is issued the requisite equipment. Were this not the reality, you can bet your sweet ass that this old warrior would have been in a shopping spree to acquire the needed stuff, not only for son #2, but for his unit as well. Fortunately for my credit card balance, this purchase was totally unnecessary! And oh yeah, combat pay has been increased.

I add this point for several reasons, first to dispel the prevailing myth that our warriors are ill-equipped, and also to remind you gentle readers that some of these current reporters have a distinct agenda in their stories. That same credit card will back up my wager that many if not all these tales of woe and foreboding are cranked up by the sons of the scorpions who ill-served us some 3 decades ago. It was the same mindset that leapt to publish all the unfounded lies and insults hurled by the 1970's-era Johnnie Kerry, simply because the press was too lazy or too stupid to seek validation of the bogus charges of widespread brutality and war crimes. Kerry knew it was a lie then, he knows it was a lie now, and he has failed to acknowledge his lack of moral fiber, decency and integrity by admitting his gross mistake.

This upcoming election is more than the simple, yet unresolved and under-funded issue of veterans care. For all the current ills of the VA system, I would simply repeat what I wrote before: the Democrats had 40 years of control to do something, and they failed or forgot to. And as one much more brilliant than I once wrote hereabouts, "When you're dead, you don't need benefits." With a profound grasp of the larger picture, he noted that waging a successful war against terrorism is the first priority of the government, for without that, all the benefits and promises therein are mute. The string of "successes" of the internationalists - Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti, Ruanda, etc. etc. - should be more than ample evidence that we don't need that variety of lunacy anywhere near the White House. People like Kerry who think we need the approval and blessings of the UN before acting in our national interest are a threat to our sovereignty. His failure to act with integrity in the past makes him patently unfit to govern in the future.

[Gimpy]

First and foremost my deepest, heartfelt wishes for a safe trip and deployment for your son to Iraq. He will be in my thoughts and prayers. As will you and your wife and families time of concern and worry while he is away. God speed and blessings of protection to him and all our troops over there.

But, you're badly mistaken about that "alledged body armor" shortage.

Just as recent as only shortly over 2 months ago retired Col. David Hackworth had this to say about that issue.

*****************
12-20-2003
Hack's Target
Have Vest, Will Loan

By David H. Hackworth

My British-made bulletproof Tetranike vest served me well in the badlands of ex-Yugoslavia, Somalia and Latin America back in my days as a war correspondent ? that is, before darling wife Eilhys changed the drill.

But that doesn?t mean the vest is also retired. No sirree. Since 9-11, my trusty Tetranike has served one tour with the Army in Afghanistan and three in Iraq: with the Army, FBI and presently protecting a retired ?snake eater? who?s training the Iraqi police force.

The reason that sucker?s so well-traveled is that the Bush administration just can?t get its priorities right when it comes to giving each and every one of our soldiers the right stuff to kick up the odds of their making it through the hit-and-run hell of insurgent combat.

About 40,000 of our sons and daughters in harm?s way in Iraq actually have to buy, borrow, beg or go without adequate body armor because a bumbling Pentagon bureaucracy hasn?t been issuing 100 percent of our troops the very best full metal jacket money can buy ? even though the money has been long appropriated.

Worried moms and pops are sending vests to their kids in care packages that in other conflicts contained cookies and Kool-Aid. A manufacturer?s ad in Army Magazine says it all: ?Our vest could be the best four pounds a soldier ever gained.?

The latest vests ? worn by a large percentage of our luckier grunts ? are composed of layered sheets of Kevlar with pockets in front and back for ceramic plates to protect vital organs and will stop a point-blank 7.62 small-arms fire. One-third lighter than the Vietnam-type gear, they, of course, aren?t the final solution, but they?re far better than anything else the engineers have cooked up to date.

Our soldiers swear by them ? and so do the docs. Body armor saves lives and has well-demonstrated its bullet- and shrapnel-stopping efficiency in bad places like Somalia, Afghanistan and now daily in Iraq ? where so far about 2,000 soldiers have been killed or wounded.

If these more modern flak jackets aren?t preventing hundreds of legs and arms from being blown off ? keeping the docs at Army hospitals like Walter Reed burning the midnight oil ? at least they?re standing between more of our kids and the morgue.
But too many troopers in Iraq tell me they still have Vietnam-era antiques that are about as effective as wrapping cotton batting around their torsos.

The reason for this Pentagon criminal negligence is twofold: first, the $310 million Congress approved for the vests got parked at various places, where bucks were siphoned off for noncombat-related items; and second, the Army has treated the vest issue the way it handles routine requisitions, such as portable toilets and tent poles.

Soldiers for the Truth executive retired Marine Lt. Col. Roger Charles was dead on target when he said, ?The Pentagon has handled the replacement of body armor as though it?s a routine general-issue item.?

A few years back, the top supply brass decided to implement a one-for-one exchange of new vests for old vests. Apparently, the realities of Afghanistan and Iraq still haven?t hit the radar screen of these logistics wizards, so biz-as-usual continues to be the order of the day ? despite the mounting casualties.

Congress is about to approve about $65 billion for the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Bush & Company haven't included one penny for body armor, even though the cost of the extraordinary security precautions on the president?s recent Asian tour would cover a vest for every soldier seconded to the Iraqi sand traps.

For sure, enough cash would be skimmed off that giant pile of taxpayer dough to fix this critical problem if Rummy, Gen. Richard Myers and a few of the Pentagon supply generals were outfitted with obsolete vests and sent off with our serving heroes to patrol the mean streets of Iraq.

The vests would suddenly be exchanged as quickly as Abrams tanks? and Bradley Fighting Vehicles? tracks get replaced ? with U.S. plants working three shifts and the heavy tracks then rushed by air to the battlefield.

Which is the way it always should be.

If we don't take care of our troops, how can they take care of us?

#####################


He also had this to say about a "shortage" of ammo.

****************
01-05-2004
Hack's Target

An Army Short of Ammo
By David H. Hackworth

?Bang, bang. You're dead.?

Neighborhood kids playing soldier in an empty lot with wooden rifles?

Nope! Regular United States warriors, during Exercise Crocodile ?03 at Shoalwater Bay, Australia, ?fighting? an Aussie reserve unit.

?We were loaded down with far more blank ammunition than we could fit in our ammunition pouches, but when we made ?contact? with the Yanks, we found that many of them had almost no blank training rounds,? Aussie Pvt. Simon Parmiter said.

?On several occasions when we opened fire we received perhaps half a dozen shots in return before the riflemen started yelling, ?Bang, bang? back at us, while the SAW ? Squad Automatic Weapon ? gunners shouted, ?Bullets, bullets, bullets?,? Parmiter continued.

?It was incredible ? the best-equipped military in the world was reduced to yelling at us instead of firing.?
?With the recent news that that unit will return to Iraq, I assume many of the chaps yelling, ?Bullets, bullets, bullets ... ? will soon find themselves in the real thing ? hopefully with more realistic training behind them, but if the shortage of live ammunition is as bad as the shortage of blank ammo appears to be, one has to wonder.?

Spoken with the wisdom of an Australian Digger, aka a mud grunt.
This report and similar accounts of ammo shortages during the past few months have caused me to check into this story with great urgency. Because soldiers fight as they train ? which, by the way, is the U.S. Army?s most heavily exercised mantra ? an Army without sufficient training ammo is an Army that will fail on the battlefield.

I posted a ?help wanted? ad on my Hackworth.com web page, and within 24 hours had received more than 500 messages from serving Army troops in the United States preparing for deployment to hot battlefields like Iraq or Afghanistan, as well as from warriors all over the world, confirming that our soldiers don?t have sufficient stocks of live or blank training ammo to prepare adequately for combat.

Although Pentagon spokesman Maj. Gary Tallman was most cooperative, it took him several weeks to line up the experts. When asked why, he said, ?Some folks here are busy playing ?pass the grenade.? ?

For sure, the ammo-shortage problem is a live grenade. But eventually I did speak with Brig. Gen. Louis Weber and Lt. Col. Susan Carlson.

Weber, recently back from Iraq ? where he served with the spearhead unit that took Baghdad ? insisted that the ?Army has adequate ammo for training and deployed units.? But he did admit that there was a lot of ground truth in the reports I?d received from the troops.

Gen. Weber explained that the Army ammo inventory includes 350 different lines of munitions, and that fragmentation grenades and blank training ammo are a problem, along with 23 other lines of ammo. When I asked for a list of the shortages, the Pentagon declined to provide it in the interests of ?operational security.?

Tallman assured me that small-arms-training ammunition is now the No. 1 single line item for procurement dollars for the 2004 budget. ?The Army will spend just over $1 billion, ahead of Stryker, upgrades for Apache, Abrams, CH-47, MLRS, procurement of communications systems and procurement of medium and heavy tactical vehicles,? he said.

West Point-trained Lt. Col. Carlson ? coincidentally the daughter of retired Col. Jerry Carlson, who served with great distinction alongside of me in Korea and Vietnam ? said that our Lake City ammo plant in Missouri ?has gone to three shifts.?

Sources say that Lake City ? both the largest Army ammo facility in the world and the producer of all the Pentagon?s small-arms ammo ? has reached ?capacity? and ?units in the field still don't have the right stuff to do the job.?

A regular Army major just back from Iraq says: ?President Bush told the armed forces, ?Help is on the way.? But in Iraq and now in the training business, I?ve seen very little help, but a whole lot of pork.?

You?d think that our Congress would have the good sense to read the coffee grains and demand that we reopen other ammo plants to prepare for a long, dangerous and most critical global war in which our very way of life is at stake.

######################

He also had this to say about recent problems within military veterans issues.

01-12-2004
Hack's Target
Politicians ? Read This before Self-Destructing

By David H. Hackworth

The recycled Pentagon types now merrily selling their ?expertise? to the weapon-makers and the rest of the current crop of shakers and takers who make up today?s military-industrial-congressional greed machine are as usual sucking up big bucks, while many of our vets continue to get the shaft. Also as usual.

Wesley Clark summed up what?s going down in a recent campaign speech: ?We've got veterans hospitals closing; we?ve got people who have to drive six hours to get a checkup; we?ve got veterans that are waiting six months to get an appointment ... that?s not health care."

If elected, Clark promises to add $2 billion to the vet health-care budget. ?We?ve got to fix the veterans? issues here in America,? he said. ?We're going to put the full funding we need to get the Veterans Affairs to meet our ... former service members? needs.?

Since 1996, the VA?s workload has increased from 3 million to 7 million vets without a comparable increase in operating funds. There?s presently neither the money nor the infrastructure to take care of all those who paid the hard price when Uncle Sam said, ?I want you.?

Which is why the enrollment of thousands of eligible vets in the category designated as Priority Group 8 ? non-service disabled vets and those with incomes higher than $24,000 a year ? were dropped like a live grenade last year.

According to VA honcho Anthony Principi, this suspension affects only the lowest priority group in the VA?s eight-tier system ? vets in Group 8. But he says Priority 8s already enrolled will be ?grandfathered? and allowed to continue in the VA health-care system.

?Who is Principi to play God?? asks Vietnam vet Lawrence Tahler. ?When is a vet not a vet, and why should these good men and women be penalized for not getting their paperwork in before some bureaucrat arbitrarily decides to change the system??

?I'm a Priority 8 Vietnam vet who was denied enrollment,? Donald Schlotz says. ?As a result, I annually spend over $7,000 on health insurance for promised care that would otherwise be provided by the VA. It looks to me like the Bush administration is trying to save money at the expense of vets who were assured they?d have health care for life.? Millions of vets who agree with Schlotz are angry because they believe the Bush administration has looked the other way when it comes to the aging veteran population.

?This action against Priority 8 vets is outrageous,? Schlotz says. ?It's particularly distasteful that this now pits vets against each other for benefits, rather than providing benefits for all. Moreover, by ?grandfathering? some vets, it discriminates between similarly situated vets based on nothing other than when they applied for benefits.?

The Priority 8s are the victims of a government that?s forgotten George Washington?s sage warning, ?The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation.?

While Clark has low-balled the money needed to get the VA program back on track, he's spot on when it comes to the 2004 election. Veterans ? and there are millions of them from sea to shining sea ? have vowed to hold our politicians? feet to the fire this time around to make sure they honor our nation's sacred obligation to the men and women whose sacrifices have made our country the freest in the world.

Principi recently said, ?Our veterans deserve nothing less than the best a grateful nation has to offer.?

Sounds good. But Principi, the president and Congress should be told that America?s vets need action, not more glowing words. Payback begins at home. Our country?s service heroes must be properly looked after before the rest of the world gets any more goodies. And certainly before the powers that be give another thought to colonizing the moon or Mars.

##############

And, yeah I keep hearing about those "last 40 years" the democrats had to "fix it"..............But............now it's been TEN YEARS since the republicans have had it to "fix" and damned if ain't WORSE now than it was then!

[colmurph]

Gimpy...if you believe everything that Hackworth spews out of his garbage hole, I've got some Oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.