John Kerry

LVCapo · Post by **LVCapo** » Mon Jul 26, 2004 11:39 pm

A couple points, then I think we should let this go, for sanities sake if nothing else.
You seem to take every single point to the extreme, and more than once read a little more into it than what is meant.
As to your point on vets losing your respect when they talk about defendding your right to bitch and moan... that sounds like sour grapes from someoene who never served, and unless you did serve, you wouldn't understand alot of our points.
I believe President Bush has done a few things wrong. I think he relied on poor intelligence as to what would happen in Iraq, i think the CIA let us down terribly. I believe that the President is far too loyal to some of his confidants, like cheney. I do not like that man at all. I believe that President Bush has reacted to our situation as well as anyone could. i am not dumb enough to believe that Iraq meant us no harm and that there were no WMD.
I also think there needs to be some changes in our country. We are going to have to sacrifice a little privacy for security, like everything else, there needs to be checks and balances. I don't think John Ashcroft has a clue, but i do think we need a better system for security in our country.
We already have selective service, so i don't understand the recruiting part??!!!
As to aggressions, you have not served so it would be hard to understand hotspots and deployment strategies. You get intel briefings on possible problem spots in the world, and train accordingly. Iraq has been a hotspot since the first gulf war, mainly because of the threat of WMD, possible terrorism, etc.
Again, how long should we wait for diplomact to work or fail? I'd be willing to bet all these people whining about the gulf war would be the first people complaing the next time we get hit on our own soil, that really cracks me up. Damned if you do, damned if you don't
I don't believe Pres Bush called it a crusade, if I'm not mistaken it was a general who said that.
I served in the region, and have two brothers that have recently returned from Iraq, they say a vast majority of the people there appreciate us and what we have done, it is the vocal minority who is unhappy, mostly Saddam supporters who lost their quality of life in the regime change. I do understand it is hard for you to understand this, you haven't seen it firsthand, only what you see on TV or read in the paper, which is always negative.
Harbouring terrorism was a very small part of the overall problem. Saddam ands his siupporters supported anything that would cause us harm. Don't believe me? As an example look at the fact that he personally paid the family of every suicide bomber to attack Israel. Look at the fact he had WMD and used them on the Kurds, look at the fact Russia has already admitted to witholding evidence that Saddam was plannin g to attack the US.
Clinton took office in 1992? North testified in 1994? That gave us 7 years before we were attacked on our soil, and we were hit at least 3 times (Cole, two embassies, etc, etc) and for all of that we launched a xouple of missiles.
All of the technology in the world is flashy andd great, but you need boots on the ground to accomplish missions. I'm not talking 3,500 person brigade task force, but there are elements within the military which are built for missions like that, yet they were not utilized right or often by President Clinton.
As to Dean, I am sorry Infinite said that not you, but everything runs together at this point. Wes Clark was an idiot, sorry. the guy was a piss poor commander, who was relieved more than once for indecisiveness. Again it is hard to find anyone who has a bad fitness report, but even his buddy bill Clinton fired Wes Clark. Then during the election, I read a US News report talking about him waffling. He gave two interviews 5 hrs apart, and took the opposite stance in each interview.
Anyway, I started this link to post something that was forwarded to me by a friend. We aren't going to agree on politics, that fine, thewre is alot else to have fun over, like fantasy football and such.

A10Pilot3 · Post by **A10Pilot3** » Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:07 am

I also agree that President Bush could've chosen someone better than Dick Cheney to be Vice President. I understand that taxes can only pay for so much stuff, but there needs to be better priorities. I think instead of any tax cuts there should be tax increases. If every American paid $10 extra to the government, that's almost 3 billion dollars. And $10 a year isn't that much, say increase tax $10 per month per person, you now have $36 billion dollars more per year. $10 a month extra isn't even anything. People don't need to spend $50+ per month for satalitte T.V. and $100's of dollars a year on cell phones. People got by 10 years ago before that stuff was around didn't they?

We need to give more money to schools, and the schools need to spend money better. In my high school we have assistants in every class, and our classes have 30 kids max. All they do is hand out papers or collect papers maybe once a day. We have 4 or 5 people in our media center, all they do is sit behind a desk and check out books and organize the shelves, which one or two people could easily do. We have tons of new Macs that they get every year, and 100 Windows 95/98 computers. Why do they keep getting Macs, get Windows computers so kids can work at home on stuff.

We also need to spend more money on our troops in Iraq so that they can have better equipment. Better equipment was what gave us a huge advantage in the first Gulf War. They have robots in Afghanistan to clear caves, so why cant they send a couple hundred to Iraq to go door to door and lose money instead of human lives?

The war in Iraq is justified whether Saddam had WMD's or not. He's an idiot and all the suicide bombings show just how many idiots there are over there. Anyone that would blow themselves up thinking they will go to heaven is an idiot. Plain and simple. Saddam had 11 or 12 years to let inspectors in and do there job, and he still could've hidden WMD's even if they were there, so I don't get why he wouldn't let them in. Kinda like when a little 5th or 6th grader was mouthing off to my brother who was in 10th or 11th grade on the bus. "Punch me, it couldn't hurt if YOU hit me, go ahead!" Smack right in the face and the kid started crying. He got what he deserved. The kid has also been kicked off the bus several times since and I think expelled from our school. They moved because he got picked on too much. I guess some people never learn, just like terrorists. What's the point of blowing yourself up if you think it will make the world a better place? because you sure as hell won't get to see the "better world".

The problem is that there are too many idiots in todays society.

Wolfgang70 · Post by **Wolfgang70** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 8:33 am

Agreed. We need to stop this thread and while I have many bones of contention with your post I'm just going to mention a couple.

First. Yes. I do give extreme examples but only to counter your own extreme examples.

Second. You don't know anything about me so don't assume I know nothing of the military. That's just plain stupid. Just so you know where I'm coming from, I'll give you a little background. My grandfather served in the Army as a sargeant in WWII. Neither of my parents served as they chose social rather than military service. My uncle and all four of his children served. Most of them married other military personel. My brother served first as a combat engineer and then as mobile infantry. I went through the whole process of signing up myself only to have a medical condition, that I never even considered a problem, keep me out. I scored in the top 2% on the exam and passed every physical. I was all set to go into military intelligence after going through basic and paratrooper training (forgive me, I forget what the official name was. Drop school?). So before you tell me I don't understand about such and such and some other thing, maybe you should ask me about my background. You think?

Other than that we should just agree to disagree.

LVCapo · Post by **LVCapo** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 11:50 am

Let me first say that serving or not serving doesn't change my view of people. The military isn't for everyone, and some people have other issues that prevent them from serving, you are a perfect example.
That being said, going through basic, or jump school, or having relatives that served doesn't necessarily give you insight into how things are. I only mentioned that because of some of what you said, in regards to foreign policy and to "fitness reports", your view of those things are clearly from someone who hadn't served, and I think if you ask any of the guys here who have/ are serving, they will agree, you can't put much stock, if any, into fitness reports.
We do disagree, I too have serious issues with some of your contentions, but you know what, this is what makes our country unique and great, we are able to have different views on some things, yet still get along.

Post by **Apoptosis** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 12:01 pm

Who is running for the Green Party? David Cobb????

Don't forget about the Green Party... if it wasn't for them the election wouldn't have been fubar in the first place.

Wolfgang70 · Post by **Wolfgang70** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 12:25 pm

But that's just it capper. I do have some insight as to how things are. My point is that you can't arbitrarily (sp) just dismiss someone because they didn't serve. Experience and understanding are two different things. Just because I don't experience something doesn't mean I can't understand it. That's what makes me lose respect for you or anyone else who uses that arguement without trying to help the other side understand. Does that make sense?

I also see a miscommunication between us. Your definition of foreign policy is closer to a military policy. Foreign policy is much broader than just military planning and implementation. But I now have a much better understanding of where you're coming from.

I also am aware that fitness reports are gloss but Kerry's public military record is one of the items I have to counter with so I'm going to use it. If he were truely unfit to serve, in either the military or the Senate, then someone should have said something at the time. Not 30 years later. Show me something that someone wrote 30 years ago that shows Kerry as unfit to lead and I'll take that into account, but 30 years is a long time and opinions have a habit of changing amid controversy. Do you understand what I'm saying here?

LVCapo · Post by **LVCapo** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 12:50 pm

I do understand what you are saying...but I disagree with part of your point. My problem is that alot of people think "they understand" things, there is no substitute for experience. It really bugs me when you hear some guy from a think tank or some professor who never served telling people how things work in the military, and they are wrong, it bugs me because they are giving people a false impression, or not giving them the whole picture.
As to foreign policy, my point of view isn't soley based on military policy or experience. I also have 4 yrs of college. If you lodse respect for me or my poinbt of view, thats just the way it goes. I think it is close minded as I have respect for you and your point of view. Please don't think or say I am trivializing your point of view, on the contrary, it is every bit as important as mine.

Wolfgang70 · Post by **Wolfgang70** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 1:12 pm

So you're saying I have to serve in order to understand how the military works? BS. I'll go along with you have to serve to understand how a soldier feels, that's a given. There is a certain almount of empathy that can be shared but there is no substitute for a person's experience. But if you're trying to tell me that I don't understand what drives a person to serve, well, that's BS too.

I understand that your view is not based solely on the military but even you have to admit that it is heavily weighted in that area.

Capper, I didn't have a single problem with our debate until you said I couldn't possibly understand and by that token you did trivialize my points. You made it sound like you were trying to write off all of my counters by closing yourself up and saying I have no capacity to understand your point of view. Well, guess what, I went to a university for 4 years too.

Looking back I realize that some of my language is a little misleading. When I said that I lost respect for you it was more in the context of this debate that it was diminished. Or any debate for that matter where someone attempts to shut off the other person with a catch phrase rather than trying to explain. I still have tremendous respect for you and what you have done for me and this country. Please never doubt that.

As for your point of view, I just disagree with some of your points as you do mine.

With no disrespect intended, of course.

Post by **Illuminati** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 7:47 pm

If I run for Pres., will you all vote for me?

Sorry, comic relief.

A10Pilot3 · Post by **A10Pilot3** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 9:21 pm

If your plans include ousting Kim Jong II, why yes, yes I would vote for you!