In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

So would I. Particularly the applications for those medals. Ever wonder
who wrote 'em?

And ever wonder who approved them??

Given the two situations, I'm inclined to vote for someone who has had
distinguished military service and a long public record, most of which I
like
vs. someone who won't answer direct questions about his verified inability
to show up and who has made an immense number of mistakes while in
office.

What is being discussed is essentially fitness to be the Commander in Chief
of the US military forces. Bush has done this for four years. Like his
decisions or not, he's proven himself up to the job with consistency and
unflagging support for our troops. Kerry, OTOH, has not had the benefit of

Totally wrong! He's put our troops in harms way for no good reason and
got 1000 of them killed, not to mention getting the rest of the world
to hate us! Great job. Sure he's been consistent... consistently
wrong.

demonstrating this. So we must rely on his fitness to be the CiC from his
previous military history. What bothers me most is that he maligned ALL the
US troops in Vietnam, calling them "war criminals" while aiding and abetting
the enemy (meeting with Madame Bihn, the titular leader of the PRG, or Viet
Cong, in Paris) while still a member of the Naval Reserves, which is truly a
war crime and treasonous. He is unfit for command, IMO, to quote the title
of the book.

Yes, Kerry has demonstrated his leadership abilities both in war and
in Congress. He never maligned "ALL" of the troops in VN. If you
actually listen to what he said, you'd know that. You're being quite
sloppy and fast and loose with the facts.
--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
And ever wonder who approved them??

IIRC, they were all approved stateside, in some obscure room in the
Pentagon. As long as they appeared proper, no one here questioned them.
The Pentagon had to rely on field commanders for veracity. Kerry's first PH
was for a band-aid scratch. His commanding officer refused to sign off on a
PH application for him because of the nature of the wound, which was minor
AND self-inflicted. PHs are only awarded when the victim is injured by
enemy action. Kerry launched a grenade incorrectly and a piece of the
rebounding shrapnel hit him. Bottom line: he did an end run around his
commander to get the application sent in. And it's exactly THAT application
plus the ones for the remaining PHs and the Silver and Bronze Stars that
Kerry won't sign off on releasing. I think it's because the PH applications
are in Kerry's own handwriting. Or perhaps signed by himself.


Totally wrong! He's put our troops in harms way for no good reason and
got 1000 of them killed, not to mention getting the rest of the world
to hate us! Great job. Sure he's been consistent... consistently
wrong.

Not according to Kerry. Or was that yesterday? I can't keep up.

demonstrating this. So we must rely on his fitness to be the CiC from
his
previous military history. What bothers me most is that he maligned ALL
the
US troops in Vietnam, calling them "war criminals" while aiding and
abetting
the enemy (meeting with Madame Bihn, the titular leader of the PRG, or
Viet
Cong, in Paris) while still a member of the Naval Reserves, which is
truly a
war crime and treasonous. He is unfit for command, IMO, to quote the
title
of the book.

Yes, Kerry has demonstrated his leadership abilities both in war and
in Congress. He never maligned "ALL" of the troops in VN.

He said "most" of the troops in Vietnam were war criminals.

If you
actually listen to what he said, you'd know that. You're being quite
sloppy and fast and loose with the facts.

Most Vietnam vets would agree with me. Kerry cast a blanket accusation over
the entire US force in Vietnam by saying "most" were guilty of atrocities.

Max

In article t,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
And ever wonder who approved them??

IIRC, they were all approved stateside, in some obscure room in the
are in Kerry's own handwriting. Or perhaps signed by himself.

Where in the world do you get this crap???


Totally wrong! He's put our troops in harms way for no good reason and
got 1000 of them killed, not to mention getting the rest of the world
to hate us! Great job. Sure he's been consistent... consistently
wrong.

Not according to Kerry. Or was that yesterday? I can't keep up.

Huh? This is according to just about every non-biases source!

We know you can't keep up! :-)

He said "most" of the troops in Vietnam were war criminals.

No he didn't.

Most Vietnam vets would agree with me. Kerry cast a blanket accusation over
the entire US force in Vietnam by saying "most" were guilty of atrocities.

Doubtful. Did you take a poll?

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

"Maxprop" wrote in message
k.net...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
And ever wonder who approved them??

IIRC, they were all approved stateside, in some obscure room in the
Pentagon. As long as they appeared proper, no one here questioned
them.
The Pentagon had to rely on field commanders for veracity. Kerry's
first PH
was for a band-aid scratch. His commanding officer refused to sign
off on a
PH application for him because of the nature of the wound, which was
minor
AND self-inflicted. PHs are only awarded when the victim is injured
by
enemy action. Kerry launched a grenade incorrectly and a piece of
the
rebounding shrapnel hit him. Bottom line: he did an end run around
his
commander to get the application sent in. And it's exactly THAT
application
plus the ones for the remaining PHs and the Silver and Bronze Stars
that
Kerry won't sign off on releasing. I think it's because the PH
applications
are in Kerry's own handwriting. Or perhaps signed by himself.

Sounds like a typical politician to me.

SV