It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New Swift Boat account defends Kerry

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 03:48 PM

Originally posted by jrsdls
kerry has seen how brutal war can be, and how fine the line is between righteousness and barbarity. i would rather vote for him than for our current president, who spent his time in that war awol drinking champaigne and then 30 years down the line sees no problems with promoting that same barbarity kerry was so shocked by, putting US troops at risk from the safety of his oval office by publicly renouncing the geneva conventions, because it makes him look tough in the eyes of his gung ho supporters.

-koji K.

Show me the proof that Bush was AWOL, and I don't want to see Micheal Moore documents. I want to see where Bush was charge with being AWOL. you use baseless banter to bring discredit upon the president, which is your choice, but you have no proof. We know that Kerry lied about Cambodia, lied about his purple hearts. What proof do you have?

there is no smoking gun document i can link to, if that's what you're expecting. however, i think the number of comments on the record and the absence of proof to the contrary, which bush promised to give but then backtracked and still has not given (which is odd since all he need do is release his military records) make a pretty convincing case that bush cannot be accounted for for at least a year of his military service.

if you'd like a collection of non or minimally partisan news articles regarding the subject, check out:
and the news article links at

oh, and i know you can't generally prove a negative, before anyone says it. but if you (or anyone else) can prove bush WASN'T AWOL, there's $10,000 in it for you. this offer has stood since early this year, and no-one has offered any proof.

-koji K.

[edit on 27-8-2004 by koji_K]

[edit on 27-8-2004 by koji_K]

posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:13 PM

Originally posted by jrsdls Hitler's aggressive moves against europe were analgous to the North Vietmanese move on the South Vietmanese. . . . If the military commanders had thier way, we would have won. If we fought Vietnam like we fought Hitler we would have won

law discussion forum
"Through dissent and protest [America] lost the ability to mobilize a
will to win," Col. Tin concluded.

Gen. giap:``In a little over decade I will be 100, but my communist spirit still remains that of a youth,'' said Giap. With photographers clustered at his feet, the animated Giap waved his arms for emphasis and even slammed his palm on his chair to drive home one point.

The general smiled with amusement when recalling how both friends and foes have for centuries underestimated the strength and determination of Vietnam's armies.

In the war against the Americans, even the supportive Soviet Union and China questioned Giap on how he expected win. A Chinese official suggested that fight could go on for a century, while a Soviet leader asked for a comparison of firepower.

Giap explained that he would have been doomed to defeat if he had tried to go toe-to-toe with the Americans and their endless waves of B-52 bombers.

``If I fought in the Soviet Union way, I could not stand for two hours,'' Giap told then-Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin. ``I will fight in the Vietnamese way, and I will win.
. . .
Giap's victories over more powerful foreign armies gave him many proud moments, but none more stirring than on April 30, 1975, the day American helicopters lifted off in a mad rush from the U.S. Embassy compound in Saigon, the South Vietnamese capital now known as Ho Chi Minh City.

``It's hard to describe how happy we were. Many of us, including me, had tears in our eyes,'' he said. ``It was a total and complete victory by Vietnam against the Western imperialists.''
Associated Press - April 8, 2000.

Pinkville @ATS

posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 01:24 AM
Look if Kerry lied about his Purple Heart and there is clear evidence that he lied about it then why does he still have his medal. Why was it not revoked? How does this one "questionable" medal overshine all the other citations he recieved. I wouldnt have a problem with the swifties if they were making allegations based on verifiable fact and not hearsay, but unfortunately they are. Their are documented examples of them misquoting and taking out of context the quotes of vietnam vets who served with Kerry to further their partisan agenda. Even if Kerry's medal was awarded under dubious circumstances and Bush was always present and fit for duty his military record still does not compare to Kerry's.
Also the only reason Kerry brought up his vietnam service was to counter the republican propaganda that no democrat has the cojones to successfully follow through on a military campaign an that all democrats are by definition big wusses.

posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:30 AM

Originally posted by boogyman
. . . the only reason Kerry brought up his vietnam service was to counter the republican propaganda that no democrat has the cojones to successfully follow through on a military campaign an that all democrats are by definition big wusses.

(I wondered how to spell cojones thanks)

I agree with what you posted. Kerry has never tried to order his stuff shreaded- didn't Bush do that with some records?

[edit on 28/8/2004 by PublicGadfly]

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in