The New Soldier - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-26-2004, 05:15 AM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 12:41 AM
The New Soldier

This website may or may not contain John Kerry at his finest hour.

http://johnkerrythenewsoldier.blogspot.com/
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 06:40 AM   #2
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Interesting! thanks, i hope i have the time to read that book.
but
http://www.independentsforkerry.org/...w-soldier.html
says that :

Quote:
It was Thursday night, after the candlelight march, when the guys came back and were on stage with the flag. There was this spontaneous feeling of pride. I sort of drew a parallel with Iwo Jima. I guess you had to, because it was with the same type of pride that they put up the flag in Iowa Jima. And when it was done - instead of burning the flag, they took it and they folded it up because as Phil Lavoie, one of the vets with the flag said, "We love America, we're not here to destroy it."

Michael Roach
Vietnam Veteran
In the end it's obvious that Mr. Kerry wants to be seen like that:

and since the team of Mr. Bush is unable to show G.W. in a more heroic pose at this time they like to discredit him as a irresponsible hippie
__________________

__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 09:02 AM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 12:41 AM
I think that Kerry has allready done that for the Bush team.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 09:14 AM   #4
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 08:41 AM
I still don't get it.

You have one man that served in Vietnam and didn't like some of the things he witnessed and another man, the closest he got was getting drunk in a Vietnamese restaurant.

I don't get the obsession with calling Kerry unfit to be Commander in Chief. What did Bush have before entering office that made anyone think he was capable? Or even now for that matter? This whole things bullshit and it just gets old.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 01:19 PM   #5
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 06:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Klaus
... and since the team of Mr. Bush is unable to show G.W. in a more heroic pose at this time ...
What are you talking about?

__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 08:08 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
I still don't get it.

You have one man that served in Vietnam and didn't like some of the things he witnessed and another man, the closest he got was getting drunk in a Vietnamese restaurant.

I don't get the obsession with calling Kerry unfit to be Commander in Chief. What did Bush have before entering office that made anyone think he was capable? Or even now for that matter? This whole things bullshit and it just gets old.
Correction! You have John Kerry who came back and attacked Veterans as well as this country. His testimony before congress was totally inaccurate, offensive and disgusting. He should apologize.

Now we have this book with a cover that mocks the sacrifice of Veterans from World War II. John Kerry's actions after Vietnam were indefensible. Yes, he was a young man and it was 30 years ago, but he has never made an apology or come out and stated that his actions were a mistake or anything similar.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 08:46 PM   #7
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 06:41 AM
You're really misrepresenting Kerry's testimony. If you want to see it as an attack on the grunts over in Vietnam, that's up to you. When I read it I see someone who was more frustrated with the men that put those grunts over there in the first place. You know, if he really hated the soldiers over there he should never have protested the war. In fact, he should have been pro-war. That way a lot more of those soldiers that he hated would have been killed.
__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 09:22 PM   #8
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


Correction! You have John Kerry who came back and attacked Veterans as well as this country. His testimony before congress was totally inaccurate, offensive and disgusting. He should apologize.

Now we have this book with a cover that mocks the sacrifice of Veterans from World War II. John Kerry's actions after Vietnam were indefensible. Yes, he was a young man and it was 30 years ago, but he has never made an apology or come out and stated that his actions were a mistake or anything similar.

I read pages 5-8 in the intro.

How do you ask someone to be the last man to die for a mistake.

It is very compelling.

I believe he was right.


Sting did something like

13 million

people die in Viet Nam. Most of them civilians. It may be time to avail yourself to more information and rethink your conclusions. I know your father served. I was at a reception on Sunday with Congressman Cox and several friends who are VN vets. I appreciate their and your fathers service. By 1971 ther was no way to anything but stop killing people.
Sure, most of them are voting for W.
They are not attacking Kerry. They have attitudes more like McCains.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 09:43 PM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ThatGuy
You're really misrepresenting Kerry's testimony. If you want to see it as an attack on the grunts over in Vietnam, that's up to you. When I read it I see someone who was more frustrated with the men that put those grunts over there in the first place. You know, if he really hated the soldiers over there he should never have protested the war. In fact, he should have been pro-war. That way a lot more of those soldiers that he hated would have been killed.
I'm not misrepresenting Kerry's testimony at all. Just look at all the quotes without sugarcoating their meaning.

If he was more frustrated with the leaders, his testimony should have focused on the leaders. It does not. Kerry goes out of his way to make inaccurate statements and lable the veterans as "not great men", as well as spending a significant amount of time talking about brutal acts of which he had no evidence of, and then claiming that all officers at all levels of command were responsible.

Most veterans were already home from the war by April 1971. I don't have the force level off hand for 1971, but there were only 20,000 US troops in Vietnam in the last year of American participation in the war in 1972. This was down from an annual total that had peaked at 560,000 in 1969.

More than 95% of the 2,500,000 Veterans who served in Vietnam were already home in April of 1971 when John Kerry made his testimony attacking them and the country.

John Kerry spit on their service and the effort that so many had fought for in Vietnam and advocated abandoning a country of 15 million people to the horrors of Communist dictatorship.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 09:50 PM   #10
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 09:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
John Kerry spit on their service and the effort that so many had fought for in Vietnam and advocated abandoning a country of 15 million people to the horrors of Communist dictatorship.
It's so black and white to you.

It wasn't your child who was burned to death by Napalm in order to be liberated from the horrors. Absolutely horrible things were done in the name of Communism, I know very well having lived through it. But absolutely horrible things were done in the name of fighting it as well. For God's sake, why is it wrong to say so?
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 10:27 PM   #11
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep



I read pages 5-8 in the intro.

How do you ask someone to be the last man to die for a mistake.

It is very compelling.

I believe he was right.


Sting did something like

13 million

people die in Viet Nam. Most of them civilians. It may be time to avail yourself to more information and rethink your conclusions. I know your father served. I was at a reception on Sunday with Congressman Cox and several friends who are VN vets. I appreciate their and your fathers service. By 1971 ther was no way to anything but stop killing people.
Sure, most of them are voting for W.
They are not attacking Kerry. They have attitudes more like McCains.
Take time to read the rest of his testimony rather than his classic anti-war statement. Its far more revealing. Most veterans do not feel their service in Vietnam was a mistake. If there was a mistake, it was in totally abandoning 14 million South Vietnamese to face the horrors of Communist dictatorship.

No, 13 million people did not die in Vietnam during the war. That would be nearly half the population in the country, North and South, or nearly every single person in South Vietnam.

The highest figure I have seen is 3 million with about half being civilians, which ratio wise is better than World War II in regards to civilian deaths.

Perhaps it is you who should avail yourself of more information so as to be more open to other conclusions.

In 1971, the United States was in the process of setting up South Vietnam so it could largely defend itself with little or no US military force. In 1972, North Vietnam launched the "Easter Offensive". It was larger than the TET Offensive of 1968, and was defeated by a military force that was 95% South Vietnamese in terms of ground troops. US forces did provide key air support, intelligence and leadership, but US participation, especially in ground combat was minimal. There were only 20,000 US troops in South Vietnam in 1972.

In March 1973, all remaining US forces left South Vietnam. For two years, South Vietnam successfully resisted North Vietnam attacks. If the United States had sent a small number of troops back in 1975, as well as large amounts of Airpower, the Communist offensive would have been defeated again, just as it had been in 1972.

It is true, the North could have then launched another offensive in 1978 or 1979, but by then South Vietnam would have had several more years to develop and grow in a variety of ways that would have made such an attack unlikely to succeed even without US assistence.

In addition, in showing such committment, the United States would likely have broken the back of funding for the Norths War effort from the Soviet Union and China. Without such funding, the North Vietnames would not be able to launch the offensives required to take over a US backed South Vietnam.

By not abandoning South Vietnam, in 2004, it would enjoy the democracy and prosperity that South Korea does today. South Korea today is a 1st world country with one of the most modern cities in the world, Seoul! Instead, South Vietnam has been under a Communist Dictatorship since the Spring of 1975, with many of those who supported the South's drive to be a free and independent country, murdered, tortured, or never heard from again. While South Korea has 1st world standard of living and ranks in the top 30 in terms of Standard of living, Vietnam today is ranked at #112. Which by the way is worse than the Palestinian Occupied territories.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 08-26-2004, 10:38 PM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


It's so black and white to you.

It wasn't your child who was burned to death by Napalm in order to be liberated from the horrors. Absolutely horrible things were done in the name of Communism, I know very well having lived through it. But absolutely horrible things were done in the name of fighting it as well. For God's sake, why is it wrong to say so?
No, its my informed opinion. Why is it so wrong to point out something that is inaccurate, offensive and simply digusting?Why is it so wrong to point out the fact that John Kerry had no evidence to back up the claims he presented and accused all officers at all levels of command of brutality with no evidence?

Please, do not talk about childern being burned to death in Vietnam as if that was the first war that happened. Its frustrating when people essentially make Vietnam out to be the first dirty war where civilians suffered and died. Virtually every terrible act you could mention happened at some point in France in the Summer of 1944. 20,000 French Civilians were killed during the Normandy invasion. I doubt you will find as high loss from any single operation or battle in Vietnam for civilians.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 08-27-2004, 01:01 AM   #13
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 08:41 AM
I know several Vietnam vets, their opinions are about split as to how this war was carried out. That's all I will say about this for it pains me to see this argued to this day.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 08-27-2004, 01:11 AM   #14
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 06:41 AM
BVS
__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 08-27-2004, 01:51 AM   #15
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 06:41 AM
John Kerry in testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, April 22, 1971.
Quote:
...I don't want to get into the game of saying I represent everybody over there, but let me try to say as straightforwardly as I can, we had an advertisement, ran full page, to show you what the troops read. It ran in Playboy and the response to it within two and a half weeks from Vietnam was 1,200 members. We received initially about 50 to 80 letters a day from troops arriving at our New York office. Some of these letters -- and I wanted to bring some down, I didn't know we were going to be testifying here and I can make them available to you -- are very, very moving, some of them written by hospital corpsmen on things, on casualty report sheets which say, you know, "Get us out of here." "You are the only hope he have got." "You have got to get us back; it is crazy." We received recently 80 members of the 101st Airborne signed up in one letter. Forty members from a helicopter assault squadron, crash and rescue mission signed up in another one.

I think they are expressing, some of these troops, solidarity with us, right now by wearing black arm bands and Vietnam Veterans Against the War buttons. They want to come out and I think they are looking at the people who want to try to get them out as a help.

However, I do recognize there are some men who are in the military for life. The job in the military is to fight wars. When they have a war to fight, they are just as happy in a sense, and I am sure that these men feel they are being stabbed in the back. But, at the same time, I think to most of them the realization of the emptiness, the hollowness, the absurdity of Vietnam has finally hit home, and I feel if they did come home the recrimination would certainly not come from the right, from the military. I don't think there would be that problem....
__________________

__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com