Grandpa Dan, a question: does it not seem a bit strange that a military doctor who served in Vietnam would claim to remember a wound that required so little treatment? Pull the fragment, irrigate the wound, slap on some antibiotic cream, bandage it and bam! Next? You don't have to get a leg blown off to earn the Purple Heart; as Bill posted, one drop of blood is enough.
Also, the man who now claims to have questioned Kerry's first Purple Heart at the time, ranked him "among the top few," the highest possible rating, in initiative, cooperation, and personal behavior.That evaluation was done two weeks after Kerry received his first wound. If Hibbard thought Kerry was medal-shopping, his evaluation would have reflected it, don't you think?
another utterly stupid statment by the logically challenged. damn those drugs did a number on him.
As El Toripdo asked a week or two back, sarcasm just goes right over your head, doesn't it? Any time you want to compare cognitive ability scores, I'm game; and you need to download a few more commas -- apparently you've run out again.
those would be what? make believe polls?
Well, we know that any poll you don't agree with will be labeled "make-believe" (order some hyphens, too, while you're at it), but here ya go.
Americans are more dissatisfied with the nation's direction than at any time in more than eight years and President Bush's job approval rating has sunk into a tie for his worst-ever showing, according to a new Gallup Poll.
The poll, released Thursday, indicates 62% of Americans are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the country. That is the highest dissatisfaction number since early January 1996 — shortly after the federal government shut down briefly when Congress failed to reach a budget agreement. Thirty-six percent of those surveyed were satisfied with the way things are going in the U.S.
More left-wing drivel, this time from the Weekly Standard, by Bill Kristol and Robert kagan.
The problem in Iraq is not poor public relations, or a lack of will. Rather, it is the failure of policymakers at the highest levels to fashion a military and political strategy that maximizes the odds of success. That is what has been missing ever since Saddam's statue fell a little over a year ago.
------
And while we certainly do not hold the administration responsible for everything that has gone wrong in Iraq, it is clear that there have been failures in planning and in execution, failures that have been evident for most of the last year. Serious errors have been made--and made, above all, by Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon. The recent violence in Iraq has confirmed that the level of American military forces has been too low to accomplish the president's mission ever since the invasion phase of the war ended last April.
------
The shortage of troops in Iraq is the product of a string of bad calculations and a hefty dose of wishful thinking. Above all, it is the product of Rumsfeld's fixation on high-tech military "transformation," his hostility to manpower-intensive nation-building in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, and his refusal to increase the overall size of the military in the first place.
I understand Limblob also compared the prison situation to fraternity hazing -- ignoring the fact that pledges more or less volunteer for hazing.
Michael Savage blames it on radical feminism in the army, and says that people in San Francisco pay good money to be treated like that -- again, ignoring the consent thing.
“Greetings, fellow Americans: And God Bless America. “I’d like to start out by saying that I love the president as much as you do. He’s doing a great job in office and he has the support of all the troops and that’s something I’ll never get even with all my service in Vietnam -- something that I’m not supposed to talk about anymore. "In case you don’t know me, my name is John Kerry. I’m kind of a nice guy and it looks like I will be the Democratic nominee for president, not that I deserve it. I’m really not qualified and I’m something of a blue-blood. Although the president can trace his family back to Henry VIII, he’s really gone beyond that aristocracy. I could learn something about that from him. "I know it's common for us political guys to ask for money. But please don't send me any. I want the campaign to go broke. If it does I can stop doing this, and no one can blame me for losing. “I’m not going to keep you long, because I know my speaking style is a bit ponderous. If you're of a mind for it, I’d be grateful for your vote in November. “But I don’t want to tell you what to do, or anything. "God Bless George Bush and God Bless America.”
You mean like “If we are an arrogant nation, they will resent us; but if we’re a humble nation, but strong, they’ll welcome us” or "I'm not so sure the role of the United States should be to go around the world and say 'this is the way it's gotta be,' " or "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called 'nation building.' "
Kerry voted for a bill authorizing the $87 billion, and including a way to pay for it. GW Bush emphatically stated he'd veto that bill if it passed. Does that mean that Bush was against providing the troops with body armor and all the other good stuff the $87 billion was for?
And what was that about The Party of Fiscal Responsibility again?
There were two bills. Kerry voted for the first one, which linked the $87 billion check to a reduction to the tax breaks for the wealthies Americans. That bill was defeated after Bush said that he would veto it. He insisted that there be no reference to taxes in the appropriation. That bill passed by a healthy margin; some Senators, Kerry among them, voted against it as a protest to the blank-check attitude of the administration. There was no chance that it would be defeated. Do try to keep up, L2F.
So both men opposed one version of the military appropriation supplemental and supported the other, but only one of them's a "flip-flopper"? Doesn't seem to follow logically.
The left is suddenly concerned with spending? Cool.
Republicans suddenly don't care about deficits? Strange . . .
Yea, and the fact remains he still voted against it.
No it's the fact that something like that was attached to a spending bill designed specifically for Iraq and Afghanistan. Try to keep up or at least use something other than Indymedia.
But Kerry voted against it as a protest. Well wouldn't be the first time Kerry did something out of protest to piss all over troops in the field.
I get accused of "Hating" GDubbya. That was TRULY a hateful thing to say.
You're right, I'm sorry, returning home while men were still dying in the field and painting them all as war criminals before congress was helpful, even when that testimony was used by the north, it was helpful. The book he wrote, you remember the one, with the soldiers on the cover mocking the raising of the flag on IwoJima with the American flag upside down, that was helpfull too. So was voting against the funding for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Why do you refuse to accept the reason why he voted as he did? I mean, even REPUBLICANS voted JUST as he did, yet they are not being villified over this Non-Issue, made Into an "Issue", for the sake of a 30 second media-spot. Shit...
Wrong. The vote was 87-12. And oh, the 12 voting nay were Dems. Including Kerry.
It's a non-issue? Weren't you the one who just posted an article blasting Bush for our troops not having enough equipment? You'll take Bush to task rightly so but not Kerry.
Kerry has made many votes, over many years, and as ANY Senator who runs for such a high ofice, they could ALL be attacked with ads like those in the exact same way and ad nauseum, and it wouldn't mean Didley, because it is a FALSEHOOD.
Falsehood? No, it's true, he voted against it. See above. When Kerry said he voted for it before he voted against it, the only thing he voted for was an ammendment attached on the military funding bill that repealled Bush's tax cut. When that failed he still had a choice and he voted no with 12 other dems and no republicans as you asserted. That's the fact.
So you're saying you'd never use or that people shouldn't be juged on their record and how they voted? That's how it works, you're juged on how you vote.
Yeah, vs. WHY he voted for any particular bill...? You forgot to mention THAT part. (Indeed, why ANY of our congressional reps. voted for or against that particular bill...eh?)
And you give the same thought when discussing VA bills that pass or don't, right, sure you do.
You also forgot to mention WHICH vote had the 12 Dems...there were Several you know...?
There were only ammendments to the bill which eother passed or didn't. The only one Kerry voted for was the ammendment to reduce the upper income tax bracket tax cuts that was attached to the troops funding bill. It failed miserbly, most Dems didn't even vote for it. The fact remains Kerry voted against it period. He still could have but decided not to in order to appease the far lefties of the party to make him look suddenly anti-war. There were only 12 other people who voted against it. All dems Imagine that.
And stop with the "Protest" bull... The Whole NATION was in revolt against the war in 1971. I Was THERE and I SAW IT. Shit, we had protesters ringing the field with signs and chants, at Cretin H.S. when we were all in ranks at our graduation "Twilight Parade" in 1972. Kerry helped STOP that war, which ALL agreed at that time, HAD TO END. Stop blaming Kery for something that the whole country was doing. It's LAME.
The whole country was protesting. Wow. Got anything to back that up?
And from what I have seen, not too many people are buying it... The fact is that if YOU had been there in '71, you to would most likely have been WISHING and HOPING that an end would come SOON as well, and you may even have been involved in the protests, as thousands of combat Vietnam-Veterans WERE by that time, in the Twin Cities. FACT.
Really? My uncle came home in 1970 after 2 tours . Didn't protest. Never accused people that had served or were still there of war crimes. I'm sure their were vets who protested, that's fine and is their right. However, there's also a way to do so. going in front of congress and spewing testimony that later turned out to be given by many who weren't even in Nam or the service isn't the way.
Lastly, the revolts against The Vietnam War were almost UNIVERSAL in 1971, and Combat-Veterans marched regularily, and by the tens of thousands on Washington D.C. and elsewhere(here), and they helped STOP the fucking war...in which tens of thousands of Combat Vets had commited attrocities, and that is NOT news anymore, it is FACT, just as it was then. And as we now know, the abuses and attrocities committed against the enemy in IRAQ is widespread, and only coming to light NOW.
Do you have something (other than Kerry' s bogus testimony to back up your claim about 10's of thousands comitting attrocities? Got a broad brush don't you. no wonder you like Kerry.
I suppose that Gen. Zinni is also a malcontent? Perhaps you think HE is also aiding the enemy, because he has been BLASTING the administration, especially the Pentagon, lately, on all the networks, and there are many, many others. ALL TRAITORS, Luv?
Did I ever call him or them a traitor? Do yourself a favor, unless I write it don't pretend I did.
Perhaps you could point to the "Testimony" that Kerry gave at that time, and tell me HOW it was used "By The North"? ...And Puhlease, Spare Me the "Jane Fonda"-bullshit too... he was NOT with her in Vietnam, and didn't know her at that time. FACT.
No he wasn't with her, just a member of the same radical organization. Birds of a feather.
North Vietnamese Col. Bui Tin, who served under Gen. Giap on the general staff of the North Vietnamese army, received South Vietnam's unconditional surrender on April 30, 1975.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal after his retirement, Col. Tin explicitly credited leaders of the U.S. anti-war movement, saying they were "essential to our strategy."
"Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9AM to follow the growth of the antiwar movement," Col. Tin told the Journal.
"Through dissent and protest [America] lost the ability to mobilize a will to win," Col. Tin concluded.
General Giap...
On Friday, Giap recalled a meeting in 1997 with Robert McNamara, the former defense secretary who led the U.S. into war.
"I told McNamara ... the U.S. lost in Vietnam because the U.S. did not understand Vietnam," Giap said, adding thanks for the anti-war movement. "During the Vietnam War, the American people supported Vietnam. I thank the American people for that
Another fact is that if the election were held today, Kerry would win in a LANDSLIDE in the Electoral College(as reported by CNN, FOX NEWS, NBC...all last night). That may upset you, but 6 in 10 Americans is a LOT of protest against THIS war. Are they all traitors too?
Try again Bill, and this time try to use facts for once and what I actually said if you want to debate. Everyone has a right to protest. I did and would defend that right. It's just as much my right however to take issue with them. And as for your political prediction based on the latest poll I'd be happy to bet you a good chunk of change that you're going to be sadly suprised and alot poorer come election day. Care to bet? With your predictions as of late and Kerry's numbers I'd be happy to bet.
You're right Bill. Sorry I criticized Kerry. After testifying about attrocities that he said he comitted and said pretty much everyone else did. Joined VVAW a group that was radical and full of frauds. Wrote a book mocking the raising of the flag at Iwo Jima and trhowing his medals, err, ribbons, err, I mean someone elses, ribbions, er ,medals. He's the perfect democratic candidate.
Gen. Giap planned and directed the military operations against the French that culminated in their defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954. During the 1960's Giap controlled guerrilla operations against South Vietnam and the United States and planned the Tet Offensive of 1968.
In his book, Giap clearly indicated that NVA troops were without sufficient supplies, and had been continually defeated time and again.
By 1968, NVA morale was at it's lowest point ever. The plans for "Tet" '68 was their last desperate attempt to achieve a success, in an effort to boost the NVA morale. When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet '68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to negotiate a surrender.
At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War was about to end, as the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat. Then, they heard Walter Cronkite (former CBS News anchor and correspondent) on TV proclaiming the success of the Tet '68 offensive by the communist NVA. They were completely and totally amazed at hearing that the US Embassy had been overrun. In reality, The NVA had not gained access to the Embassy--there were some VC who had been killed on the grassy lawn, but they hadn't gained access. Further reports indicated the riots and protesting on the streets of America.
According to Giap, these distorted reports were inspirational to the NVA. They changed their plans from a negotiated surrender and decided instead, they only needed to persevere for one more hour, day, week, month, eventually the protesters in American would help them to achieve a victory they knew they could not win on the battlefield. Remember, this decision was made at a time when the U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000, at the end of 1967, beginning of 1968.
Late at night, in the closing days of the legislative session, lobbyists, state workers and even some lawmakers gathered in offices at the State Capitol to drink beer, wine and liquor, KMSP-TV reported Wednesday night.
The station showed trash cans full of beer, wine and liquor bottles and suggested that at least some the alcohol of might have been provided by lobbyists. Lobbyists are not allowed to give gifts to legislators.
``What's troubling me is the coziness of the lobbyists and lawmakers,'' former House Majority Leader Ernest Lindstrom said after watching hidden-camera video taken by the station.
Lindstrom, a Republican who was majority leader in 1971 and 1972, said he had never seen such things before because he prohibited lobbyists from bringing alcohol into the Capitol.
``The appearance of impropriety - it weakens the whole process and causes people to feel like they're disappointed in their Legislature,'' he said.
KMSP said state policy forbids state workers from drinking on the job, even during rest breaks and overtime work.
The station taped someone carrying a cooler into the office of Senate Majority Whip Linda Higgins. The Minneapolis DFLerwas on the Senate floor at the time, in the final hours before adjournment, but several people were in her office drinking. KMSP said most of them were lobbyists. One lobbyist was sitting behind her desk, drinking a beer.
Higgins issued a written statement to KMSP saying it was unfortunate that its news team was ``failing to focus on the dedication of members and staff who work round the clock ... to pass important legislation.''
The statement did not address the station's questions about alcohol in her office. When a KMSP reporter cornered her at the DFL State Convention last weekend, Higgins would not say whether the liquor in her office came from lobbyists.
Higgins declined comment when reached by The Associated Press.
The station said it also saw lobbyists, state workers and lawmakers drinking in the office of Senate President James Metzen, DFL-South St. Paul.KMSP said it never saw Metzen drinking, and that he did not respond to requests for comment, but Rep. Scott Wasiluk, DFL-Maplewood,came over to his office while the House was in a late-night session.
``I came to raid your whisky,'' Wasiluk said.
``That's what it's there for,'' Metzen replied.
The station showed Wasiluk back on the House floor for a vote on a health care issue, looking sleepy. It also showed him at another point misunderstanding what was taking place on the floor as he monitored the session on TV from Metzen's office.
Sleep expert Dr. Mark Mahowald said the combination of sleep deprivation and alcohol hurts decision-making ability.
``So we have people making very important decisions who are not functioning as well as they could ... If you add alcohol to that, their decision-making will be even more impaired,'' he told the station.
House Minority Leader Matt Entenza, DFL-St. Paul, told the station he hadn't seen a lot of drinking at the Capitol. Shown the tape of Wasiluk, he said: ``Everyone is better off if we stay focused and stay to business.''
Wasiluk issued a statement to the station saying: ``I sincerely apologize for my recent behavior. If the public feels additional laws should be passed to improve public confidence in the work of legislators, I would vote for it.''
Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson, DFL-Willmar, told the station he didn't think the drinking was widespread. ``In the last week of the session, I never ... smelled alcohol on any of my colleagues,'' he said.
Shown a table full of bottles the station had recovered from Capitol trash bins, House Speaker Steve Sviggum, R-Kenyon, had a concise response.
he served his country part time to avoid having to actually...you know...go serve his country like the thousands and thousands of men who had no choice in the matter. He had his service cake and ate it too. If he was against the war, he should have joined the peace corp and if he was for it, he should have enlisted and actually gone.
Grandpa Dan, a question: does it not seem a bit strange that a military doctor who served in Vietnam would claim to remember a wound that required so little treatment? Pull the fragment, irrigate the wound, slap on some antibiotic cream, bandage it and bam! Next? You don't have to get a leg blown off to earn the Purple Heart; as Bill posted, one drop of blood is enough.
Also, the man who now claims to have questioned Kerry's first Purple Heart at the time, ranked him "among the top few," the highest possible rating, in initiative, cooperation, and personal behavior.That evaluation was done two weeks after Kerry received his first wound. If Hibbard thought Kerry was medal-shopping, his evaluation would have reflected it, don't you think?
Damn, Bill -- jethro just demolished your entire argument with one sentence. We must bow down before his awesome intellect.
another utterly stupid statment by the logically challenged. damn those drugs did a number on him.
Hopefully, and as the polls are beginning to show all too clearly, he may AT LEAST be rejected before he can be re-appointed.
those would be what? make believe polls?
As El Toripdo asked a week or two back, sarcasm just goes right over your head, doesn't it? Any time you want to compare cognitive ability scores, I'm game; and you need to download a few more commas -- apparently you've run out again.
Well, we know that any poll you don't agree with will be labeled "make-believe" (order some hyphens, too, while you're at it), but here ya go.
More left-wing drivel, this time from the Weekly Standard, by Bill Kristol and Robert kagan.
This is starting to remind me of that Monty Python skit where John Cleese plays the Navy officer:
"When I say there is no cannibalism in the Royal Navy, I mean.....NOT MUCH!"
Camera pans around a group of Navy guys. One of them is chewing on a human leg. Cleese runs over and puts his hands in front of the lens.
Gotta laugh or you're gonna cry.
I understand Limblob also compared the prison situation to fraternity hazing -- ignoring the fact that pledges more or less volunteer for hazing.
Michael Savage blames it on radical feminism in the army, and says that people in San Francisco pay good money to be treated like that -- again, ignoring the consent thing.
They're getting good yucks about it.
Limbaugh should be grateful for it. It gave him a chance to lash out at Bill Clinton, yesterday. Not that he needs much of a reason.
Limbaugh must finally be coming down from all those drugs.
You could send him some pointers, crabs.
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
crabgrass 5/7/04 7:32pm
Grow up.
what do you mean?
Torpedo doesn't want me to talk to him, but he keeps talking to and about me.
All I'm doing is putting his request in place of what I would say to him if he hadn't told me to stop talking to him.
It's actually a rather mature response.
hey Rich?
do you actually read the shit Torpedo posts?
Talk to me crabgrass - Torpedo-8
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
Crabgrass, talk to Torpedo-8 - THX 1138
now why would I do that, THX?
Log Cabin Republicans told to stay out
"Homosexuality is not normal" and their agenda is "counterproductive to the Republican agenda."
Evidently Republicans are a pretty confident group down south. They can alienate anyone they choose, and they can't lose.
“Greetings, fellow Americans: And God Bless America.
“I’d like to start out by saying that I love the president as much as you do. He’s doing a great job in office and he has the support of all the troops and that’s something I’ll never get even with all my service in Vietnam -- something that I’m not supposed to talk about anymore.
"In case you don’t know me, my name is John Kerry. I’m kind of a nice guy and it looks like I will be the Democratic nominee for president, not that I deserve it. I’m really not qualified and I’m something of a blue-blood. Although the president can trace his family back to Henry VIII, he’s really gone beyond that aristocracy. I could learn something about that from him.
"I know it's common for us political guys to ask for money. But please don't send me any. I want the campaign to go broke. If it does I can stop doing this, and no one can blame me for losing.
“I’m not going to keep you long, because I know my speaking style is a bit ponderous. If you're of a mind for it, I’d be grateful for your vote in November.
“But I don’t want to tell you what to do, or anything.
"God Bless George Bush and God Bless America.”
How about a speech where he doesn't contradict something he said 2 months prior, that would be a start.
You mean like “If we are an arrogant nation, they will resent us; but if we’re a humble nation, but strong, they’ll welcome us” or "I'm not so sure the role of the United States should be to go
around the world and say 'this is the way it's gotta be,' " or "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called 'nation building.' "
Oh, wait -- that wasn't John Kerry. Never mind.
I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called 'nation building.' "
Didn't something occur that caused a change in that position, I mean other than political expediency? Hmmmmmm.... Now let me think....
Even the Bush administration has admitted that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
Thank you for playing. Don, what do we have as a parting gift for jethro?
I actually voted for the 87 billion......before I voted against it. I love that one.
I love that one.
Good times. Good, good times.
Kerry voted for a bill authorizing the $87 billion, and including a way to pay for it. GW Bush emphatically stated he'd veto that bill if it passed. Does that mean that Bush was against providing the troops with body armor and all the other good stuff the $87 billion was for?
And what was that about The Party of Fiscal Responsibility again?
And what was that about The Party of Fiscal Responsibility again?
I'm with ya there, Pieter.
Even the Bush administration has admitted that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
Saddam supported terrorists so he was a legitmate target in the WOT. And just think as of right now we are at the door step of Iran and Syria.
The left is suddenly concerned with spending? Cool. Yea, wouldn't want to have body armor.
The fact is Bush didn't veto it. Kerry voted against it.
There were two bills. Kerry voted for the first one, which linked the $87 billion check to a reduction to the tax breaks for the wealthies Americans. That bill was defeated after Bush said that he would veto it. He insisted that there be no reference to taxes in the appropriation. That bill passed by a healthy margin; some Senators, Kerry among them, voted against it as a protest to the blank-check attitude of the administration. There was no chance that it would be defeated. Do try to keep up, L2F.
So both men opposed one version of the military appropriation supplemental and supported the other, but only one of them's a "flip-flopper"? Doesn't seem to follow logically.
Republicans suddenly don't care about deficits? Strange . . .
Yea, and the fact remains he still voted against it.
No it's the fact that something like that was attached to a spending bill designed specifically for Iraq and Afghanistan. Try to keep up or at least use something other than Indymedia.
But Kerry voted against it as a protest. Well wouldn't be the first time Kerry did something out of protest to piss all over troops in the field.
I missed the speech last night.
I'll have to watch it on CSPAN.org tonight when I get home.
if Bush makes weekly "update" speeches, he's gonna run the risk of appearing to be using Iraq to make canpaign speeches.
So, what is the "right path"?
I don't disagree with you in theory, but when was the last time the UN or NATO mattered?
They're impotent.
If Bush doesn't speak he gets accused of not speaking to the American people. If he does he gets accused of making election speeches.
No kidding, Luv.
Dubya can't win with some people. No matter what he does, it's the wrong thing, simply because he's Dubya.
I swear, part of me hopes Kerry wins.
The Lefties think Dubya's doing such a horrible job, just wait....
if Bush makes weekly "update" speeches, he's gonna run the risk of appearing to be using Iraq to make canpaign speeches.
Since Iraq is the only issue then it must be addressed.
the Iraqi scientists say they were shipped to Iraq.
My position was that the best chance for the democrats was John Edwards. If he had won the nomination I think he would be far ahead in the polls.
You're right, I'm sorry, returning home while men were still dying in the field and painting them all as war criminals before congress was helpful, even when that testimony was used by the north, it was helpful. The book he wrote, you remember the one, with the soldiers on the cover mocking the raising of the flag on IwoJima with the American flag upside down, that was helpfull too. So was voting against the funding for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Wrong. The vote was 87-12. And oh, the 12 voting nay were Dems. Including Kerry.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00400
It's a non-issue? Weren't you the one who just posted an article blasting Bush for our troops not having enough equipment? You'll take Bush to task rightly so but not Kerry.
Falsehood? No, it's true, he voted against it. See above.
When Kerry said he voted for it before he voted against it, the only thing he voted for was an ammendment attached on the military funding bill that repealled Bush's tax cut. When that failed he still had a choice and he voted no with 12 other dems and no republicans as you asserted. That's the fact.
So you're saying you'd never use or that people shouldn't be juged on their record and how they voted? That's how it works, you're juged on how you vote.
What a horseshit graduation.
And you give the same thought when discussing VA bills that pass or don't, right, sure you do.
There were only ammendments to the bill which eother passed or didn't. The only one Kerry voted for was the ammendment to reduce the upper income tax bracket tax cuts that was attached to the troops funding bill. It failed miserbly, most Dems didn't even vote for it. The fact remains Kerry voted against it period. He still could have but decided not to in order to appease the far lefties of the party to make him look suddenly anti-war. There were only 12 other people who voted against it. All dems Imagine that.
The whole country was protesting. Wow. Got anything to back that up?
Really? My uncle came home in 1970 after 2 tours . Didn't protest. Never accused people that had served or were still there of war crimes. I'm sure their were vets who protested, that's fine and is their right. However, there's also a way to do so. going in front of congress and spewing testimony that later turned out to be given by many who weren't even in Nam or the service isn't the way.
Do you have something (other than Kerry' s bogus testimony to back up your claim about 10's of thousands comitting attrocities?
Got a broad brush don't you. no wonder you like Kerry.
Did I ever call him or them a traitor? Do yourself a favor, unless I write it don't pretend I did.
No he wasn't with her, just a member of the same radical organization. Birds of a feather.
North Vietnamese Col. Bui Tin, who served under Gen. Giap on the general staff of the North Vietnamese army, received South Vietnam's unconditional surrender on April 30, 1975.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal after his retirement, Col. Tin explicitly credited leaders of the U.S. anti-war movement, saying they were "essential to our strategy."
"Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9AM to follow the growth of the antiwar movement," Col. Tin told the Journal.
"Through dissent and protest [America] lost the ability to mobilize a will to win," Col. Tin concluded.
General Giap...
On Friday, Giap recalled a meeting in 1997 with Robert McNamara, the former defense secretary who led the U.S. into war.
"I told McNamara ... the U.S. lost in Vietnam because the U.S. did not understand Vietnam," Giap said, adding thanks for the anti-war movement. "During the Vietnam War, the American people supported Vietnam. I thank the American people for that
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/040501/ap/d829f12o0.html
Try again Bill, and this time try to use facts for once and what I actually said if you want to debate. Everyone has a right to protest. I did and would defend that right. It's just as much my right however to take issue with them. And as for your political prediction based on the latest poll I'd be happy to bet you a good chunk of change that you're going to be sadly suprised and alot poorer come election day. Care to bet? With your predictions as of late and Kerry's numbers I'd be happy to bet.
You're right Bill. Sorry I criticized Kerry. After testifying about attrocities that he said he comitted and said pretty much everyone else did. Joined VVAW a group that was radical and full of frauds. Wrote a book mocking the raising of the flag at Iwo Jima and trhowing his medals, err, ribbons, err, I mean someone elses, ribbions, er ,medals. He's the perfect democratic candidate.
Gen. Giap planned and directed the military operations against the French that culminated in their defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954. During the 1960's Giap controlled guerrilla operations against South Vietnam and the United States and planned the Tet Offensive of 1968.
In his book, Giap clearly indicated that NVA troops were without sufficient supplies, and had been continually defeated time and again.
By 1968, NVA morale was at it's lowest point ever. The plans for "Tet" '68 was their last desperate attempt to achieve a success, in an effort to boost the NVA morale. When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet '68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to negotiate a surrender.
At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War was about to end, as the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat. Then, they heard Walter Cronkite (former CBS News anchor and correspondent) on TV proclaiming the success of the Tet '68 offensive by the communist NVA. They were completely and totally amazed at hearing that the US Embassy had been overrun. In reality, The NVA had not gained access to the Embassy--there were some VC who had been killed on the grassy lawn, but they hadn't gained access. Further reports indicated the riots and protesting on the streets of America.
According to Giap, these distorted reports were inspirational to the NVA. They changed their plans from a negotiated surrender and decided instead, they only needed to persevere for one more hour, day, week, month, eventually the protesters in American would help them to achieve a victory they knew they could not win on the battlefield. Remember, this decision was made at a time when the U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000, at the end of 1967, beginning of 1968.
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Camp/7624/Generals/giap.htm
TV report shows drinking at Capitol in closing days of session
Associated Press
May 27, 2004
Late at night, in the closing days of the legislative session, lobbyists, state workers and even some lawmakers gathered in offices at the State Capitol to drink beer, wine and liquor, KMSP-TV reported Wednesday night.
The station showed trash cans full of beer, wine and liquor bottles and suggested that at least some the alcohol of might have been provided by lobbyists. Lobbyists are not allowed to give gifts to legislators.
``What's troubling me is the coziness of the lobbyists and lawmakers,'' former House Majority Leader Ernest Lindstrom said after watching hidden-camera video taken by the station.
Lindstrom, a Republican who was majority leader in 1971 and 1972, said he had never seen such things before because he prohibited lobbyists from bringing alcohol into the Capitol.
``The appearance of impropriety - it weakens the whole process and causes people to feel like they're disappointed in their Legislature,'' he said.
KMSP said state policy forbids state workers from drinking on the job, even during rest breaks and overtime work.
The station taped someone carrying a cooler into the office of Senate Majority Whip Linda Higgins. The Minneapolis DFLerwas on the Senate floor at the time, in the final hours before adjournment, but several people were in her office drinking. KMSP said most of them were lobbyists. One lobbyist was sitting behind her desk, drinking a beer.
Higgins issued a written statement to KMSP saying it was unfortunate that its news team was ``failing to focus on the dedication of members and staff who work round the clock ... to pass important legislation.''
The statement did not address the station's questions about alcohol in her office. When a KMSP reporter cornered her at the DFL State Convention last weekend, Higgins would not say whether the liquor in her office came from lobbyists.
Higgins declined comment when reached by The Associated Press.
The station said it also saw lobbyists, state workers and lawmakers drinking in the office of Senate President James Metzen, DFL-South St. Paul.KMSP said it never saw Metzen drinking, and that he did not respond to requests for comment, but Rep. Scott Wasiluk, DFL-Maplewood,came over to his office while the House was in a late-night session.
``I came to raid your whisky,'' Wasiluk said.
``That's what it's there for,'' Metzen replied.
The station showed Wasiluk back on the House floor for a vote on a health care issue, looking sleepy. It also showed him at another point misunderstanding what was taking place on the floor as he monitored the session on TV from Metzen's office.
Sleep expert Dr. Mark Mahowald said the combination of sleep deprivation and alcohol hurts decision-making ability.
``So we have people making very important decisions who are not functioning as well as they could ... If you add alcohol to that, their decision-making will be even more impaired,'' he told the station.
House Minority Leader Matt Entenza, DFL-St. Paul, told the station he hadn't seen a lot of drinking at the Capitol. Shown the tape of Wasiluk, he said: ``Everyone is better off if we stay focused and stay to business.''
Wasiluk issued a statement to the station saying: ``I sincerely apologize for my recent behavior. If the public feels additional laws should be passed to improve public confidence in the work of legislators, I would vote for it.''
Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson, DFL-Willmar, told the station he didn't think the drinking was widespread. ``In the last week of the session, I never ... smelled alcohol on any of my colleagues,'' he said.
Shown a table full of bottles the station had recovered from Capitol trash bins, House Speaker Steve Sviggum, R-Kenyon, had a concise response.
``Uff da,'' he said.
Ted Kennedy's done it for years and nobody cared :) Just don't let Ted Drive you home. Well without scuba gear anyway.
I always love that one.
GW served his country. Not all Presidents have.
However, I wouldn't base my vote solely on that.
he served his country part time to avoid having to actually...you know...go serve his country like the thousands and thousands of men who had no choice in the matter. He had his service cake and ate it too. If he was against the war, he should have joined the peace corp and if he was for it, he should have enlisted and actually gone.