"John H" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 15:28:45 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
news
This veteran, and those with whom I associate, place John Kerry right
up there with Jane Fonda on our list of despicable people.

Possible trap - please step in it:

1) What labels do you have for Henry Kissinger during the time when Kerry
was doing the things which you feel made him a traitor? And, could you
please refresh me on what activities you feel made him a traitor?

2) What labels do you have for thousands of other vets who came home from
that war totally disgusted with our government and its policies?

3) What labels do you have for the parents whose political viewpoints
were
radicalized by the foolishness of that war?

None of them are running for President. I've never labeled Kerry a
traitor. Where did that come from?

Kerry made implications about soldiers serving in Vietnam. I performed
none of his claimed atrocities. None of my soldiers performed those
atrocities (that I'm aware of), and I know of none having been
performed in the division to which I was assigned. I found the My Lai
massacre atrocious and think the officer in charge should have been
hung.

Kerry indicates that "free fire zones" allowed the intentional killing
of women and children. Bull****.


John H

Perhaps they exaggerated based on an emotionally charged climate. And, I
used the word traitor because I believe it was pivotal earlier in this
thread. But, let's replace that with "despicable", so you can answer the 3
questions I posed for you. Whether someone's running for president is
irrelevant. Unless you subscribe to the deity mentality, they are people who
are equal to you and I.

On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 19:22:18 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 15:28:45 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
news
This veteran, and those with whom I associate, place John Kerry right
up there with Jane Fonda on our list of despicable people.

Possible trap - please step in it:

1) What labels do you have for Henry Kissinger during the time when Kerry
was doing the things which you feel made him a traitor? And, could you
please refresh me on what activities you feel made him a traitor?

2) What labels do you have for thousands of other vets who came home from
that war totally disgusted with our government and its policies?

3) What labels do you have for the parents whose political viewpoints
were
radicalized by the foolishness of that war?

None of them are running for President. I've never labeled Kerry a
traitor. Where did that come from?

Kerry made implications about soldiers serving in Vietnam. I performed
none of his claimed atrocities. None of my soldiers performed those
atrocities (that I'm aware of), and I know of none having been
performed in the division to which I was assigned. I found the My Lai
massacre atrocious and think the officer in charge should have been
hung.

Kerry indicates that "free fire zones" allowed the intentional killing
of women and children. Bull****.


John H

Perhaps they exaggerated based on an emotionally charged climate. And, I
used the word traitor because I believe it was pivotal earlier in this
thread. But, let's replace that with "despicable", so you can answer the 3
questions I posed for you. Whether someone's running for president is
irrelevant. Unless you subscribe to the deity mentality, they are people who
are equal to you and I.


Not sure I understand the question. Who exaggerated? I have no label
for Kissinger, none for the thousands of other disgusted (and a few
disgusting-) vets, and none for the parents with radicalized
viewpoints. My mother had three of her sons over their. She absolutely
detested Clinton.

If Kerry were not running for President, he wouldn't be the topic of
this exchange. Therefore, his running is relevant. If Edwards were the
nominee, we sure wouldn't be on this subject!

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"John H" wrote in message
...


Kerry indicates that "free fire zones" allowed the intentional killing
of women and children. Bull****.


John H

Perhaps they exaggerated based on an emotionally charged climate. And, I
used the word traitor because I believe it was pivotal earlier in this
thread. But, let's replace that with "despicable", so you can answer the
3
questions I posed for you. Whether someone's running for president is
irrelevant. Unless you subscribe to the deity mentality, they are people
who
are equal to you and I.


Not sure I understand the question. Who exaggerated? I have no label
for Kissinger, none for the thousands of other disgusted (and a few
disgusting-) vets, and none for the parents with radicalized
viewpoints. My mother had three of her sons over their. She absolutely
detested Clinton.

If Kerry were not running for President, he wouldn't be the topic of
this exchange. Therefore, his running is relevant. If Edwards were the
nominee, we sure wouldn't be on this subject!

John H

Subtract "running for office", and you're talking about nothing but
bare-bones ideology. Do you find Kerry despicable because he was seen in the
same city as a N. Vietnamese flag, and perhaps even touched one? Plenty of
returning soldiers and their families protested the war in shocking ways.
According to my information, two things are true:

1) The domino theory was nonsense invented by a small handful of suits, like
McCarthy, and the war we fought based on the theory turned out to be a total
waste of lives and resources.

2) In order to run for president, you only need to meet certain age &
citizenship requirements. You do NOT have to keep your mouth shut when you
see your country behaving irresponsibly.

On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:25:34 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .


Kerry indicates that "free fire zones" allowed the intentional killing
of women and children. Bull****.


John H

Perhaps they exaggerated based on an emotionally charged climate. And, I
used the word traitor because I believe it was pivotal earlier in this
thread. But, let's replace that with "despicable", so you can answer the
3
questions I posed for you. Whether someone's running for president is
irrelevant. Unless you subscribe to the deity mentality, they are people
who
are equal to you and I.


Not sure I understand the question. Who exaggerated? I have no label
for Kissinger, none for the thousands of other disgusted (and a few
disgusting-) vets, and none for the parents with radicalized
viewpoints. My mother had three of her sons over their. She absolutely
detested Clinton.

If Kerry were not running for President, he wouldn't be the topic of
this exchange. Therefore, his running is relevant. If Edwards were the
nominee, we sure wouldn't be on this subject!

John H

Subtract "running for office", and you're talking about nothing but
bare-bones ideology. Do you find Kerry despicable because he was seen in the
same city as a N. Vietnamese flag, and perhaps even touched one? Plenty of
returning soldiers and their families protested the war in shocking ways.
According to my information, two things are true:

1) The domino theory was nonsense invented by a small handful of suits, like
McCarthy, and the war we fought based on the theory turned out to be a total
waste of lives and resources.

2) In order to run for president, you only need to meet certain age &
citizenship requirements. You do NOT have to keep your mouth shut when you
see your country behaving irresponsibly.

While testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on
April 23, 1971, Kerry said U.S. soldiers had "raped, cut off ears, cut
off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and
turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at
civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food
stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam."

Note the generalizations. He didn't limit his comments to "only those
soldiers he knew" or "only sailors on river boats."

Yes, I find his actions despicable. His stance against the war has no
bearing on my attitude towards him. If he wanted to berate the
politicians who got and kept us in the war, he was welcome to do so.
If he wanted to berate his commanders for allowing him to commit
atrocities, that's fine also.

He stated he committed acts "not knowing they violated the Geneva
Convention." Bull****. Is he implying that Navy officers received no
Geneva Convention training? Army officers sure did.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!