John Kerry the Betrayer: Unfit to Command, part 3

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Agathon
Make no mistake, I would rather see Bush elected. Then the rest of the world will realize that it has to band together to Gulliverize the US. When that's finished, common sense can prevail again.

Way I see it, it's a no lose proposition for a US hater such as yourself.

[Patroklos]

I would say that those Gernals support him because they are retired with political aspirations, were already allied to Kerry because of party affiliation, and they would have come to the defense of ANY democtratic candidate. They are not "socialists, communists, liberal internationalists," they are loyal democrats.

The Republicans have a much larger and more impressive array of Generals an Admirals. I actually trust them more because they are not glory hounds like Clarke, and stay relatively low on the radar. They don't come to the aid of the anti-kerry vets because unlike Kerry's boys they are not a part of Bush's campaign. They are independant, with funding from other independant Republicans which does not equal Bush's campaign.

And once again, the anti-kerry guys are not even all republican! They just don't like Kerry, while all Kerry's Gernerals are partisan democrat.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Guardian

Well, you have to realize how these B-52s operated at the time.

Unlike modern air campaigns, these were not surgical strikes aimed at specific targets. It was actually more like the carpet bombings of WW II, only with tremendously increased firepower. The B-52s flew in groups, targeted "boxes" of a couple of square kilometers at a time and pretty much obliterated everything within that box.

The thing is, when you wreak havoc on such a grand scale, it does tend to hurt civilians no matter what your policy is on the matter.

Sihanouk said at the time that there were no Cambodians in the border enclaves we were attacking. There were no complaints by Cambodia, or for that matter by North Vietnam, that a single civilian was killed.

Not one.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned


Sihanouk said at the time that there were no Cambodians in the border enclaves we were attacking. There were no complaints by Cambodia, or for that matter by North Vietnam, that a single civilian was killed.

Not one.

Riiight

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by GePap
Advising the DNC and a 527 is slightly (slightly) different from advising a 527 and the actual campaign of a candidate. While the DNC obviously is pro-Kerry, they don;t run his campaign, or any other campaign directly.

According to the article there are individuals indeed representing the campaign or party and outside organizations. My guess is Sandlers one of them.

Gotta love the double standard both of the DNC and its media tool, especially when the instance its applied to is to make sure the law isn't actually broken.

[Ned]

Originally posted by CerberusIV

Having read this thread and its predecessor on and off I am left with only one thought - the US gets the President it deserves.

Makes me rather glad not to live in the US if this is all that goes on for one year in every four.

You see to think Kerry will be elected. This Swiftboat controversy has more than erased his post-convention bounce. The issue is doubt.

What this thread also shows is the complete dishonesty of the antiwar types both from Vietnam and now.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


According to the article there are individuals indeed representing the campaign or party and outside organizations. My guess is Sandlers one of them.

Gotta love the double standard both of the DNC and its media tool, especially when the instance its applied to is to make sure the law isn't actually broken.

If a double standard existed, they would not have mentioned that in the firt place- earlier in this thread people said Kerry brought this "scandal" on himself by bringing attention to his war record- well, as the NYTimes itself states, Bush and his people have broght themselves into the limelight, and thus have been forced to deal with it. Call it cosmic Karma.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Spiffor

He is a politician. He saw his war record as an advantage, and he spun it and exaggerated it to get support. That's an ordinary move.

That he used his war record as one of his main electoral arguments (if not the main one) shows that he overuses it as a political resource. This always means spin, and half-truths.

Siffor, I think you are neglecting Kerry's role after he returned from Vietnam and began to attack not only the war, but his brethern. He was the most prominent member of the Vietnam Veterans Against war. He even said that he committed war crimes.

One cannot both say that he is a war hero and an antiwar hero.

From a political point of view, it is interesting that he got thru the Democrat primaries without this conflict being raised and vetted.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Agathon


He hasn't. He's made it clear that he's pissed off, and that is what anyone would expect.

These clowns did it too early. Their case is so shaky that it will be effectively destroyed in the coming weeks, and that will make Bush look bad. It would have been over already if the media had any spine. But they seem to think that both sides of a debate should get a fair hearing all the time, instead of only when one side isn't obviously full of ****, which is the case here (and yes, it's the anti-Kerry group that is FOS).

Agathon, you obviously do not understand the issues.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Agathon


Why do you think so many generals and former diplomats have come out in support of Kerry? They know that the US is most effective at getting its own way by means of traditional diplomacy. Clinton was a master at that - something he gets too little credit for.

They aren't socialists, communists, liberal internationalists or people who want the US to prostrate itself before the world. They seem to me to be people who wish to preserve and enhance American influence in the world, and they are smart enough to know that Bush is doing his best to destroy it.

Why of course, "Weakness, vaccillation, procrastination, flip-floping, and insincerity is strength!"

[Ned]

Originally posted by Ming
And buried at the tail end of the story...





I love how people are pointing fingers, trying to take the moral high ground, when they are doing the exact same thing...

I guess it's too much to ask for this campaign to be fought on the "issues"... but nah, we are talking about the good ole USA here

Issues?

Character is the issue.

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap


Riiight

GePap, once more you display a studied ignorance. If you want an exact quote of what Sihanouk said, I will provide it.

[Arrian]

How in the world does what a tinpot aristocrat's public version of events have to do with what was actually going on?

-arrian

[Agathon]

Way I see it, it's a no lose proposition for a US hater such as yourself.

We just want you to behave and play nicely with others.

Agathon, you obviously do not understand the issues.

*picks self up off floor



*wheezes

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by GePap


If a double standard existed, they would not have mentioned that in the firt place- earlier in this thread people said Kerry brought this "scandal" on himself by bringing attention to his war record- well, as the NYTimes itself states, Bush and his people have broght themselves into the limelight, and thus have been forced to deal with it. Call it cosmic Karma.

Excuse me, but it was the SBV who approached Ginsberg for advice on legal issue to proceed w/o entaglement into issues of legality wrt 527. To imply that the Bush team orchestrated their efforts is disingenuous. Do ties exist, yes of necessity.

Unlike the premeditated ties of moveon.org, DNC, and team Kerry.