"JohnH" wrote in message
...

I sure don't recall seeing the body bags being
unloaded at Travis during the Vietnam war. What would be the purpose?

Hmm. I remember seeing plenty of pictures. My father says this is what woke
him up, after a period of believing whatever Washington was spewing. He
turned on a dime. One day, he was Mr Gung Ho, WWII former torpedo bomber
pilot, telling me a should follow in his footsteps. Next day, he was saying
that when he was fighting, there was a clear cause, but that someone was
beginning to stink with the Vietnam war.

....or "something" was beginning to stink....

"jps" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news
I did not see a lot of cameras at Travis AFB when 50,000 dead came home
from
South East Asia under a Democrat President. Where was your indignation
then. And they came home in an aluminum casket.

Weak argument. I recall seeing actual footage of fighting on the evening
news and plenty of caskets coming off planes.

I was a teenager and plenty indignant!!!


I was at Travis and most of the pictures were of demonstrators spitting on
returning soldiers. Where was the indignation against the leaders?

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 17:12:53 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:

I did not see a lot of cameras at Travis AFB when 50,000 dead came home
from South East Asia under a Democrat President.

When did Nixon become a Democrat? Since you seem to be counting, 20,000
of those dead were under his administration.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...

What position am I so hypocritical about. Do you not find the idea of
televising
funerals very tasteful?

You're the one making a mountain out of a molehill. The White House is so
stupid and mistrusting of Americans, it doesn't want us to know kids are
getting killed and will do whatever it can to make certain it's not covered.

No one suggested televising funerals. Just don't ban the press from access
to the body bags coming off the planes.

Give the kids who're wounded proper medical attention in a timely fashion.
Don't charge kids wounded in Iraq $8.25 a day for hospital meals. Don't
**** with their benefits, don't cut off their combat pay, give them all
bullet proof vests, not just two thirds of them.

Seems like this'd be a no-brainer for Republicans, who'da thunk the White
House would act so much in bad faith with the very people they're asking to
put their lives on the line.

This seems to once again come down to the old Republican adage, "We'll make
sure you get born, you do the rest." In other words, even in the perilous
service of your country, you need to look out for yourself, 'cause GW Bush
and his cabinet sure aren't going to.

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:56:34 -0800, "jps" wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .

What position am I so hypocritical about. Do you not find the idea of
televising
funerals very tasteful?

You're the one making a mountain out of a molehill. The White House is so
stupid and mistrusting of Americans, it doesn't want us to know kids are
getting killed and will do whatever it can to make certain it's not covered.

No one knows because the incidents aren't reported, or what?


No one suggested televising funerals. Just don't ban the press from access
to the body bags coming off the planes.

Why not televise funerals. If privacy and dignity are not a concern, which
apparently they are not (to you anyway), then why not get permission from the
families and show everything on the tube. It would get your message across,
wouldn't it?


Give the kids who're wounded proper medical attention in a timely fashion.
Don't charge kids wounded in Iraq $8.25 a day for hospital meals. Don't
**** with their benefits, don't cut off their combat pay, give them all
bullet proof vests, not just two thirds of them.

They get as good medical attention as we can offer. Wounded do not "pay" for
their meals in a hospital. Many soldiers receive a basic allowance for
subsistence (BAS), which is given to them monthly in lieu of meals. The military
has already paid for them to provide their own food (at the soldier's choice).
When the soldier eats military food, he reimburses the money he has received.
This has been the rule since I was a private (1965). Combat pay is stopped when
the soldier is no longer in a combat zone. Are you suggesting it continue for as
long as the soldier is a soldier? (That would have meant a hell of a lot of
money for me!) Lastly, soldiers had flak vests. All of them. Some of the vests
were of the newer design with ceramic inserts. All soldiers had not been
equipped with these when we started the war. The items had not been produced
yet. As they are getting produced, the vests are being upgraded. Maybe you
should complain that the soldiers in Vietnam didn't have these either. Hell, we
didn't even have Kevlar!

Seems like this'd be a no-brainer for Republicans, who'da thunk the White
House would act so much in bad faith with the very people they're asking to
put their lives on the line.

The bad faith is in your (et al) imagination. I know it must be infuriating to
want to **** and moan so much, and have it mean so little. But that's life in
the big city. Eventually you'll find someone who believes everything you say
simply because it was on the internet.

This seems to once again come down to the old Republican adage, "We'll make
sure you get born, you do the rest." In other words, even in the perilous
service of your country, you need to look out for yourself, 'cause GW Bush
and his cabinet sure aren't going to.

I wish to hell we had had the "looking out for" that today's soldiers have. I
would have loved to be able to call home once in a while, or send an email
almost every day, or even have my own web site.

jps, your arguments are trash. ****ing in the wind will get you wet.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

JohnH wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:56:34 -0800, "jps" wrote:



Give the kids who're wounded proper medical attention in a timely fashion.
Don't charge kids wounded in Iraq $8.25 a day for hospital meals. Don't
**** with their benefits, don't cut off their combat pay, give them all
bullet proof vests, not just two thirds of them.

They get as good medical attention as we can offer.

No, they don't. And there have been plenty of news articles in the media
indicating how ****-poor "military" medical attention is.



John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD


--
Email sent to will never reach me.

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 19:44:41 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:56:34 -0800, "jps" wrote:



Give the kids who're wounded proper medical attention in a timely fashion.
Don't charge kids wounded in Iraq $8.25 a day for hospital meals. Don't
**** with their benefits, don't cut off their combat pay, give them all
bullet proof vests, not just two thirds of them.

They get as good medical attention as we can offer.

No, they don't. And there have been plenty of news articles in the media
indicating how ****-poor "military" medical attention is.



John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
Show me. I have yet to see where anyone has lost a life or suffered effects of
military medical malpractice.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

"JohnH" wrote in message
...

Show me. I have yet to see where anyone has lost a life or suffered
effects of
military medical malpractice.

I take it you follow this issue closely, right? If so, how?

JohnH wrote:

Show me. I have yet to see where anyone has lost a life or suffered effects of
military medical malpractice.

You mean on the news, or in real life?

DSK