So, what you're saying is that you either have very limited direct
experience with VN vets or that you think someone who is wounded three
times, who commands troops in action, who is awarded a bronze and a
silver, and who has the option of leaving, should stay or be declared
unpatriotic.

I am a Viet Nam vet. In reply to your other question I don't know of any
soldier who was in Viet Nam who was awarded medals but was not injured to the
point where he couldn't fight left before his tour was up. Kerry's so called
wounds were nothing. Maybe he knew about the 3 medals you get to go home rule
and that's why he became "wounded" so many times in a short period of time.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"Trains are a winter sport"

In article ,
SAIL LOCO wrote:
So, what you're saying is that you either have very limited direct
experience with VN vets or that you think someone who is wounded three
times, who commands troops in action, who is awarded a bronze and a
silver, and who has the option of leaving, should stay or be declared
unpatriotic.

I am a Viet Nam vet. In reply to your other question I don't know of any
soldier who was in Viet Nam who was awarded medals but was not injured to the
point where he couldn't fight left before his tour was up. Kerry's so called
wounds were nothing. Maybe he knew about the 3 medals you get to go home rule
and that's why he became "wounded" so many times in a short period of time.

Being a vet does not necessarily qualify you to make the
generalization.

Also, it seems like you're saying that since Kerry availed himself of
what he could, that that somehow disqualifies him from being a war
hero and patriotic. Why would anyone want to stay in a place like that
any longer than possible?? His wounds were supposedly nothing, but
somehow you've become the arbiter of what does and what doesn't
qualify, over and above what the military seems to think on the
subject. According to you, he didn't serve admirably, yet according to
Bush he did.

If you want to talk about being unpatriotic, perhaps you should talk
about Bush deciding not to follow a direct order to have a physical,
shirking his duties, and being penalized for it by having his service
agreement extended by 6 months as punishment. Perhaps wasting millions
of dollars of taxpayer money by not doing as he was ordered is ok with
you, but it's not ok with me. I think that's pretty unpatriotic.



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 29 Sep 2004 18:37:29 GMT, (SAIL LOCO) said:

Maybe he knew about the 3 medals you get to go home rule
and that's why he became "wounded" so many times in a short period of time.

Or, as some have suggested, he or somebody acting on his behalf knew
somebody higher up who knew about the rule.

And, maybe someone higher up or who had political connections got Bush
into the NG ahead of 100s of others. Or, maybe someone who pressured
Bush's commander to not make waves about his lack of attendance???



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 29 Sep 2004 18:37:29 GMT, (SAIL LOCO) said:

Maybe he knew about the 3 medals you get to go home rule
and that's why he became "wounded" so many times in a short period of time.

Or, as some have suggested, he or somebody acting on his behalf knew
somebody higher up who knew about the rule.

So, just to follow up, what you're saying is that it's not ok to
follow the rules, but it is ok to go around them. I thought ignorance
of the law was no excuse, but it looks like knowing the law is now
wrong. By that logic, following the law should be outlawed, and
breaking the rules ok just fine.

Do you even read what you wrote?? Are you really that ignorant, or is
this just a good show for us non-lawyers?

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 29 Sep 2004 12:48:05 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

Or, as some have suggested, he or somebody acting on his behalf knew
somebody higher up who knew about the rule.

So, just to follow up, what you're saying is that it's not ok to
follow the rules, but it is ok to go around them.

A bit tetchy on that one are we? I don't think that's what I said. Simply
reporting the speculations of others without passing judgment on one way or
the other.

So, you're ducking the issue... answer the question pea brain. Well, I
can see why you wouldn't.

Times, they are a changing...

The latest Electoral College data...

http://www.electoral-vote.com

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

On 29 Sep 2004 11:07:32 -0700, (Jonathan
Ganz) wrote this crap:

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Bush had 6 mos added to his requirements
because he failed to complete his duties.


That's bull****. But what about Kerry's missing eight years?





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

In article ,
Horvath wrote:
On 29 Sep 2004 11:07:32 -0700, (Jonathan
Ganz) wrote this crap:

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Bush had 6 mos added to his requirements
because he failed to complete his duties.


That's bull****. But what about Kerry's missing eight years?

You're right. Kerry is going to win. What about your boy friends? Are
they turning up missing?
--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

"SAIL LOCO" wrote in message
...
I am a Viet Nam vet. In reply to your other question I don't know of any
soldier who was in Viet Nam who was awarded medals but was not injured to
the
point where he couldn't fight left before his tour was up. Kerry's so
called
wounds were nothing. Maybe he knew about the 3 medals you get to go home
rule
and that's why he became "wounded" so many times in a short period of
time.

Do you think that GWB would have gone to Vietnam if he knew that he could
get sent home so easily?



Regards


Donal
--

On 29 Sep 2004 15:16:29 -0700, (Jonathan
Ganz) wrote this crap:



That's bull****. But what about Kerry's missing eight years?

You're right. Kerry is going to win.


Kerry is going down faster than a hooker at a bachelor party.






Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

In article ,
Horvath wrote:
On 29 Sep 2004 15:16:29 -0700, (Jonathan
Ganz) wrote this crap:



That's bull****. But what about Kerry's missing eight years?

You're right. Kerry is going to win.


Kerry is going down faster than a hooker at a bachelor party.


So, do you know because you've been the hooker or been serviced by one
of the transvestite hookers you're so fond of?

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."