Ms. Looney, may I ask why you chose not to serve?

Actually, I did consider the Air Force. They tried to recruit me as a Navigator or Pilot based on some tests that I had taken before graduating high school (good spacial and 3d recognition skills I think), but when they found out that I was a 'girl' the offer was changed to other non-combat occupations. I guess they assumed I was a guy because of my scores.

In the 60's it was rare for women to serve in the military: unlike now where it is very common. In the meantime, my family needed me to be at home to help take care of a disabled family member.

I generally agree that John Kerry is an idiot.

I believe though that the context of his statement WAS concerning the state of affairs our country is in and was intended as a criticism of the opportunities our country currently affords those of lower academic achievement.  Kinda like: "Look what is available to you under our current administration; it sucks". 

I think he is seriously dumb if he thought that his 'joke' would achieve it's intended result.  Very very easy to confuse the message he was trying to convey

[quote=BondGuy]

I wanted to make sure you weren't getting your information from Bob Perry or The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Who, ironically turned out to be liars.[/quote]

Says who? I wasn't interested in them exploring the fog of war when it came to the minute details of the circumstances of his decorations. I doubt many could survive that sort of scrutiny.

But their larger point, the fact that he told tall tails about his “Christmas in Cambodia”, that his fellow officers didn’t think much of him, that his tour of duty was 1/3 the standard length than he slurred them upon his return in order to spark a political career. Those were important truths, and probably explains why something along the lines of 70% of active duty service members voted against him.

[quote=BondGuy]If we turn the clock back 35 years, while not liking what Kerry was doing, it's at least understandable. Within the context of the times attacking the vets was just another antiwar strategy. [/quote]

Sorry, there's no "understanding" the smear of US troops in Vietnam Kerry conducted, and there's no forgetting what a craven opportunist the guy is. My father served two tours, we all take that sort of thing to heart.

I'm not in the military, nor have I been.  That said, my association is as follows:

My father was in the Navy as a Radioman, 3rd class.  Never saw any action and served four years.

My brother-in-law is currently in the Marines.  He is getting two weeks of leave Nov. 14-28 so that he can come home and get married before he goes off to Asia (first Japan for three months, followed by Korea). 

My close friend was in the Army and served in Bosnia while much of that conflict was taking place.  Saw some action, but made it home safely.

Finally, my grandfather (mother's side) was in WWII.  He served in Europe and was part of the later wave that took Normandy.  He spent 12 years in the Army and came away with a Purple Heart and Bronze Star.

I have utmost respect for those that served, both in wartimes and non-wartimes.  The fact that someone is selfless enough to put their life on the line day-in, day-out so that I can criticize my gonvernment, along with many of the other freedoms we have that those in other countries could be killed for, is what is great about this country and I take my hat off to those that serve for me. 

[quote=dude]

I generally agree that John Kerry is an idiot.[/quote]

I don't understand why Kerry, a sub-par Yale student (so much so that he was rejected by Harvard, where Bush got his MBA), spends so much time making jokes about the intellect of someone who earned an almost identical GPA. I says so much about this smug, money-marrying elitist snob.

tails = tales

[quote=BondGuy]

Babs,

I wanted to make sure you weren't getting your information from Bob Perry or The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Who, ironically turned out to be liars.

If we turn the clock back 35 years, while not liking what Kerry was doing, it's at least understandable. Within the context of the times attacking the vets was just another antiwar strategy. I too thought it was wrong. Personally, I won't go see a Jane Fonda movie. Yet, calling all vets baby killers was a way to drum up support for peace. In the times, as you know, not only was it accepted, it was widely supported.  Kerry found his political footing in this movement. The entire country was being torn apart by the war. For a young person with political aspirations the anti war movement was almost too good to be true. It was a no brainer "How to get elected white paper." Just join the movement. He did, in the most contrived way, by first serving in the military and by fighting in the war. Even though, he admits, when he joined he had no intention of getting in harm's way. And even by cynically saying he served as part of a plan isn't quite right, because back then, there were only so many ways out of the war. How was he to know that 20 to 35 years later, that draft dodgers would be in control? Now, 35 years later we've lost the emotional context of that era, but the words remain as part of the official record. Words that are brought out and displayed at every RNC meeting in the country.

The Vets have every right to be pissed off this guy, but don't ever buy into the spin. Not taking kerry at his word that his comments were directed at Bush is implausable. Regardless of what you think of him, kerry is not a stupid man. Only a complete imbecile would make a comment like that a week before an election. Take the cheap shot if you wish, Kerry's not an imbecile. As for an apology, for what? He misspoke, he owes noone an apology.

About Clinton the draft dodger- You've got to remember the times. Early on, mid 60s males were running to the fight. Nam was their    WW II. By 68 momentum had shifted. Everyone was trying to get out of the draft. College deferments were the order of the day. The 68 democratic convention and the 70 shootings at Kent State were hallmarks of the times.

 Clinton ran to Oxford, used politcal influence to avoid draft, acceptable as measured in context by the times. Most families were looking for ways to get their sons out of the draft. The ending of graduate deferments went to the issue of how desperate the government was to fill its quota.

Bush ran and hid in the National Guard, used political influence to avoid duty. I use the term hid as it was used by us all at that time. Hiding in the National Guard was an acceptable, if last ditch effort, to avoid Vietnam. This is why I harbor no ill will for Bush having done so. We were all headed there if need be.

Cheney- racked up what was it, eleven deferments? His comment when asked why he chose not to serve was "I had better things to do" is truly insulting to troops everywhere and in every time. Yet, within the context of the times, acceptable.

Rumsfeld-Served in the navy as a carrier pilot. He came of age between Korea and Vietnam. Which is a shame because, no doubt he would have landed an F4 in North Vietnam and micromanaged them into surrendering, kicking their asses the whole time. I don't like what Rummy's done with Iraq, but on whole, he's my kind of guy.

So when you call Clinton a draft dodger, it's not an insult. He shares that distinction with many others, including our President and Vice President. They are all products of the times. Within the context of that time, none is wrong for their choice. All are wrong for trying to use it as a smear.

Finally, there's Rice. Rice is one of the major architects of our new "pre-emptive war" foreign policy. She believes that the world will be a safer place if it's all one big happy democracy. And that, while we stand unchallenged as the world's only super power, now is the time to strike. Now, when no military can challenge us. She's right, it would be safer. Yet, the world doesn't want to be a big happy democracy. Sovereign nations and people aren't cozying up to the idea of do it our way or else. Go figure! So, I gotta disagree on Rice.

[/quote]

Man, BondGuy...you are a voice of balanced reason, you actually make sense.  I was beginning to think that folks around here only responded after referencing The Republican Codex's chapter on acceptable opinions.

When are people going to realize that real life doesn't fit into a polarized black and white framework?  There are innumerable ways to look at and solve problems...not just through a Liberal/Conservative lenz.

[quote=StarsAndStripes]

Question for all of you:

If you posted regarding this topic, would you please share YOUR personal military experience?  I would be interested in your feedback...  Call it curiousity more than anything else.  Remember, please don't fib as I am an active service member and can see right through you...

To doberman, NOFX, badmove, BrokerRecruit, Starka, My Inner Child, BondGuy, MikeButler22, BabblingLooney, Vagabond, and AirForce...  My thanks in advance...

[/quote]

What, are you kidding? Does military service give you some moral advantage over those of us who didn't serve? And if so, where does that leave Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz and the rest of the chickenhawks? OK with you if they speak to the issue?    

[quote=StarsAndStripes]

Question for all of you:

If you posted regarding this topic, would you please share YOUR personal military experience?  I would be interested in your feedback...  Call it curiousity more than anything else.  Remember, please don't fib as I am an active service member and can see right through you...

To doberman, NOFX, badmove, BrokerRecruit, Starka, My Inner Child, BondGuy, MikeButler22, BabblingLooney, Vagabond, and AirForce...  My thanks in advance...

[/quote]

We don't have to have any military experience to comment, nor do we have to have been a senator to comment. Your post makes me wonder if Jon Carry wasn't right, afterall.

[quote=dude]Man, BondGuy...you are a voice of balanced reason, you actually make sense. [/quote]

It's human nature to think someone who agrees with you is the "voice of reason", dude...

[quote=dude] I was beginning to think that folks around here only responded after referencing The Republican Codex's chapter on acceptable opinions.[/quote]

It's a feature of our current political culture that some people seem to think that those who don't agree with them aren't reaching their conclusions based on their own review of the facts, they’re simply programmed and easily led…..

MikeB said:

Sorry, there's no "understanding" the smear of US troops in Vietnam Kerry conducted, and there's no forgetting what a craven opportunist the guy is. My father served two tours, we all take that sort of thing to heart.

Reply:

So do you really believe the Bush Administrations BS about why Iraq?  To me it smells of opportunistic hubris as much as Kerry's behavior, if not more.

[quote=BondGuy]Cheney- racked up what was it, eleven deferments? His

comment when asked why he chose not to serve was “I had better things to

do” is truly insulting to troops everywhere and in every time. [/quote]



(Cheney’s Five Draft Deferments During the Vietnam Era Emerge as a

Campaign Issue - nytimes.com)



FWIW Cheney’s quote is "“I had other priorities in the 60’s than military

service.” when the Wash Post asked him about his five deferals when he was

being being reviewed to become the Sec Def.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=dude]Man, BondGuy...you are a voice of balanced reason, you actually make sense. [/quote]

It's human nature to think someone who agrees with you is the "voice of reason", dude...

[quote=dude] I was beginning to think that folks around here only responded after referencing The Republican Codex's chapter on acceptable opinions.[/quote]

It's a feature of our current political culture that some people seem to think that those who don't agree with them aren't reaching their conclusions based on their own review of the facts, they’re simply programmed and easily led…..

[/quote]

MikeB, I assure you that I don't doubt your command or review of the pertinent facts...I just doubt your conclusions.  As a matter of fact, when we were debating a similar topic (Bush admin/Iraq War etc..) I remember discussing the failure of the war (although you disagreed) concerning escalating violence etc...

Since then things have gotten worse.  Care to comment as to why I should agree with your position?  Even Bush is mincing words concerning a 'change' of approach. 

As for my comments to bondguy, I don't necessarily agree with all his points; I can't stand Rumsfeld...I agree more with his paradigm and generally non partisan approach.  It doesn't sound like it's coming from the Loony Lefties or the Self Righteous Righties.

[quote=dude]

So do you really believe the Bush Administrations BS about why Iraq?  To me it smells of opportunistic hubris as much as Kerry's behavior, if not more.

[/quote]

You must be joking, dude. You going to come up with some alternative reason now? Lemme guess, oil, right?

Kerry slurred the very troops he served with, while thousands were still in Vietnam in the fight, and he did it to start a political career.

[quote=dude][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=dude]Man, BondGuy...you are a voice of balanced reason, you actually make sense. [/quote]

It's human nature to think someone who agrees with you is the "voice of reason", dude...

[quote=dude] I was beginning to think that folks around here only responded after referencing The Republican Codex's chapter on acceptable opinions.[/quote]

It's a feature of our current political culture that some people seem to think that those who don't agree with them aren't reaching their conclusions based on their own review of the facts, they’re simply programmed and easily led…..

[/quote]

MikeB, I assure you that I don't doubt your command or review of the pertinent facts...I just doubt your conclusions. [/quote]

I, and others that disagree with you, won’t ever sound like “a voice of balanced reason”, we’re never going to “make sense”, dude. It’s pure human nature. Bondguy agrees with on the larger issues and is one of a limited number that does so.

[quote=dude][As a matter of fact, when we were debating a similar topic (Bush admin/Iraq War etc..) I remember discussing the failure of the war (although you disagreed) concerning escalating violence etc...

Since then things have gotten worse. Care to comment as to why I should agree with your position? [/quote]

You don’t have to agree with me, and you’re free to call it a “failure”, a term usually reserved for post-event, reviews, not commentary on an ongoing event. To me that desire to reach a final conclusion long before the curtain closes says a great deal.

[quote=BondGuy]....and the rest of the chickenhawks?    [/quote]

[quote=dude]

I generally agree that John Kerry is an idiot.

I believe though that the context of his statement WAS concerning the state of affairs our country is in and was intended as a criticism of the opportunities our country currently affords those of lower academic achievement.  Kinda like: "Look what is available to you under our current administration; it sucks". 

I think he is seriously dumb if he thought that his 'joke' would achieve it's intended result.  Very very easy to confuse the message he was trying to convey

[/quote]

Wait a sec, are you saying you think he was saying if you don't do well in school you'll end up in the military?

If so, what do you think that might be confused for, as you say in your last paragraph?

BTW, since people joining the military have a higher average education than the public at large, what's your specific point about currently affords those of lower academic achievement?

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=dude]

So do you really believe the Bush Administrations BS about why Iraq?  To me it smells of opportunistic hubris as much as Kerry's behavior, if not more.

[/quote]

You must be joking, dude. You going to come up with some alternative reason now? Lemme guess, oil, right?

Kerry slurred the very troops he served with, while thousands were still in Vietnam in the fight, and he did it to start a political career.

[/quote]

Nope.  Let me quote myself here:

[quote=dude]Iraq is a poorly thought out and poorly executed attempt at bludgeoning the middle east into parity with the rest of the world.  Although the ideal is admirable and would be great for the world in the long run...it's the logistics of the whole thing that makes the idea laughable.  Just look at the results...[/quote]

Helping stabalize oil supply might play into it somehow, but I think that's a brazen and short sighted accusation given the bigger prize... 

I think that the intentions were good....though, the path to Hell is paved with good intentions.

Yes, John Kerry is an opportunistic ass...so is Bush. 

None of the primary reasons for going to Iraq have ever materialized...connections to Al Queda, WMD etc...At the time it required a BIG stretch to connect Iraq to Al Queda as well as lay the foundation for a 'pre-emptive' strike (it's laughable that we were 'pre-empting' anything other than some scuds maybe hitting the Iraq desert on their way to Israel).  It leaves me wondering if Bush was being opportunistic to 'forge' a new middle east?

Look, if you told me one thing to motivate me to act (maybe that Iraq had WMD's etc...), then I act based on your info.  You better believe that your credibility would be lost if I showed up and there was no evidence of your claims.  Why is Bush exempt from this?

Maybe because he's a Republican?

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=dude]

I generally agree that John Kerry is an idiot.

I believe though that the context of his statement WAS concerning the state of affairs our country is in and was intended as a criticism of the opportunities our country currently affords those of lower academic achievement.  Kinda like: "Look what is available to you under our current administration; it sucks". 

I think he is seriously dumb if he thought that his 'joke' would achieve it's intended result.  Very very easy to confuse the message he was trying to convey

[/quote]

Wait a sec, are you saying you think he was saying if you don't do well in school you'll end up in the military?

If so, what do you think that might be confused for, as you say in your last paragraph?

BTW, since people joining the military have a higher average education than the public at large, what's your specific point about currently affords those of lower academic achievement?

[/quote]

I think you're stupid if you think Kerry would mean what your implying while trying to get elected.  Give me a break, he's not that dumb (just dumb enough).

Actually, I don't think you're stupid...it's just that your only framework for opinions seems to come from the National Republican Codex, so it colors the value of your insight.  An honest person would admit that Kerry was not intending to say what amounts to:

"Stupid Americans enlist in the military"

Only Republican Opportunists would suggest that.

I am not suggesting that Kerry articulated his point well at all. 

[quote=mikebutler222]

You don’t have to agree with me, and you’re free to call it a “failure”, a term usually reserved for post-event, reviews, not commentary on an ongoing event. To me that desire to reach a final conclusion long before the curtain closes says a great deal.

[/quote]

Ok, so when does someone admit failure?  When we don't find WMD's or any 'smoking gun' links to Al Queda, or when civil war erupts, or when after the Govmnt falls and the population begins to fight us, or when..... Not that I advocate 'cut and run'.  This has been an awfully executed war with little in the way to justify it.  Whether we establish a stable government or not I would hope that in the history books the Iraq war is not cited as an example of why we should go to war or how it should be executed.  Would you call a project that spiralled out of control, had egregious cost overruns and evidence of poor planning a success, even if eventually the desired outcome manifested?  It will be someone elses mess to clean up anyway since Bush is gone in 2 years...they might get it right, would it be a success then?

A country fraught with ethnic tensions, crafted out of WWI by colonial imperialist interests, populated by a culture that is religiously and socially at odds with ours who has been suffering under the weight of economic destitution is not a fertile soil to plant the seed of a Western Style democracy...especially not at the hands of it's 'oppressor'.  We may not agree with the paradigm of America as an oppressor, but only an idiot would ignore that the average muslim in the Middle East does when trying to convince the masses to hop on board.  It's the population of Iraq whom we're fighting now (and who are now fighting each other), not Saddam's government.