Kerry’s medals were awarded from senior officers in accordance with Navy procedures. From the Navy Inspector General, Vice Admiral R.A. Route (at the previous link):
[quote]“Our examination found that existing documentation regarding the Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart medals indicates the awards approval process was properly followed,” Route wrote in the memo sent Friday to Navy Secretary Gordon England.
“In particular, the senior officers who awarded the medals were properly delegated authority to do so. In addition, we found that they correctly followed the procedures in place at the time for approving these awards.”[/quote]
Purple hearts are not awarded for mere scratches, which means your statement above contradicts the Navy’s own account. Could you provide evidence for your claim? As I’m sure you’re aware, John Kerry released his full military medical records in July 2005, so it should be an easy task to find an objective source (such as a public interest group) which was reviewed the data and concurs that his war injuries were “mere scratches.” Right?
John McCain’s incredible heroism and bravery is not a subject of dispute with me.
Your understanding, as best as I can see it, comes not from objective sources but from right-wing attack dogs. Incidentally, this is John McCain’s response to the attack ad against Kerry issued by the so-called Swift Boat Vets for Truth:
[quote=“Tigerman”]Was Kerry brave to volunteer for duty? Of course. But, he bolted when he had the chance… not saying that I wouldn’t have left first opportunity, either… that’s what most men would have done. That’s why Kerry is not a hero, IMO. Because McCain decided to stay… refused to leave, when given the opportunity, in what were arguably more miserable conditions, McCain did what few would choose to do. That’s what makes McCain a hero, IMO, again.
Because I don’t think of Kerry as a war hero, I have never defended him against arguments that he is not a war hero.[/quote]
Ah, so the issue is not whether Kerry was brave, but whether he meets your criteria for being a hero. Actually, I think the term hero is used far too often. But nowadays, anybody who has worn a uniform and been anywhere near a battlefield is called a hero by the MSM. Presumably, the military disagrees and presents medals only to those who go above and beyond the call of duty. Kerry was decorated several times and is accredited with 20 enemy kills in a 5 month period. Is that enough to be a hero? It depends on how that word is defined. At the very least, he served with honor and distinction. I agree with McCain that the attacks against him were dishonest, and dishonorable.
Kerry served honorably aboard a destroyer off the coast of Vietnam and then left the blue-water navy to go into the swift boats for a second tour. Giving up being an ice-cream eater to go into the highly dangerous brown-water navy, running up and down rivers in a tiny boat made of thin aluminum is, in itself, enough to make him a war hero in my eyes. (The boats were rather hastily converted from boats intended to ferry workers to and from oil rigs, and the lack of armor meant that swift boaters would hang flak jackets over the sides.) Special forces soldier Jim Rassmann (see opinionjournal.com/editorial … =110005460 for his opinion piece, published in WSJ which tends to be strongly conservative) credits Kerry’s courage and leadership with saving his life. Rassmann, a Republican, came out to counter the bullshit allegations of the smearboaters.
Tigerman, have you saved anybody’s life? If so, then I’m glad. Extra points for you if you’ve risked your own life to save another person’s life. I hope you’re a hero to somebody. But Kerry stuck himself into harms way way, way more than he needed. Considering that you’re not posting any of your stuff from Iraq or Afghanistan right now, my guess is that you’ve decided not to do what Kerry did – volunteer to serve and complete a tour … and then volunteer again to go up and down rivers in a tinfoil f*cking boat with jungle on both sides of you.
“In contrast”, I figure it would be appropriate if you here discussed McCain’s lack of fidelity to his wife once he came back to find her crippled. That’s a good way to contrast Kerry and McCain.
Of course, pilots also tend to want to continue flying (with the notable exception of Bush, who stopped showing up for flight phsyicals right about the time the military started to check for dope addicts) because it’s good for their career. You do recall that as a graduate of Canoe U. and the son and grandson of admirals, McCain probably did see switching to a new carrier would be a good way to continue the only career he knew of at that time.
Now, just to show that I’m entirely reasonable on this, I’ll grant something to McCain that you would never grant Kerry – I completely respect that he (like Kerry) chose to serve in a way that involved great inherent danger. I respect that greatly. The act of taking further acts to put themselves into harm’s way is only “icing on the cake” above and beyond the courage of volunteering to put on the uniform. But I see that your respect for these people is not consistent – if you don’t like the politics of the guy then their service is shit, and if you like their politics then their service is golden.
And it was good of him not to give his captors that further bit of propaganda value – the North Vietnamese savored the idea of highlighting the class differences by showing how the son and grandson of admirals would accept this sort of early release as a privilege due his “class”.
And yet before he “bolted” he also did numerous other kinds of “bolting” – i.e., he bolted right back into danger to rescue Jim Rassmann while under heavy fire in a f*cking tinfoil motorboat. He didn’t even have the safety of 20,000 feet of distance between him and the NVA and VC when he was under fire. What he had was a wall of impenetrable jungle, often on both sides of his tinfoil boat, while he putt-putted about with enough noise to alert the enemy long before he came around the bend of a river. And despite the horseshit attempts by the smearboaters to claim he jumped out of his boat to shoot an “unarmed” “kid” in the back, all accounts by people who were actually there confirm that Kerry “bolted” to shoot a VC with an armed B-40 rocket launcher. His crew have been vocal in saying Kerry saved their lives – had the B-40 been fired, they’d have gone up in flames.
Did Kerry leave the Vietnam war after three purple hearts? Yes. In those days, reassignment was automatic after 3 purple hearts unless the person specifically wanted to stay. Considering the way U.S. forces were structured in those days with massive amounts of support, maintenance and supply troops, and with relatively few (as a percentage of all troops serving in Vietnam) grunts humping up and down the hills to get shot at, considering that Kerry and the swiftboaters were the waterborne versions of those grunts, he saved lives and killed enemies. And he sure has hell spent a lot more time in direct combat than McCain spent, but I’ll let Hackworth cover that later.
Well, I suppose you’ve got high standards, higher than guys like green-beret Rassmann. Please regale us with your basis for your higher standard for hero, citing from your own personal history of saving the lives of others and of killing enemies.
Of course, McCain also offered material information within days of being captured in exchange for medical treatment, check out David Hackworth’s take on McCain: hackworth.com/25jan00.html
[quote]None of the awards, less the DFC, were for heroism over the battlefield – where he spent no more than 20 hours. Two Naval officers described the awards as “boilerplate” and “part of an SOP medal package given to repatriated (Vietnam-era) POWs.”
McCain’s Silver Star narrative for the period 27 October 1967 – the day after he was shot down – to 8 December 1968 reads: “His captors… subjected him to extreme mental and physical cruelties in an attempt to obtain military information and false confessions for propaganda purposes. Through his resistance to those brutalities, he contributed significantly towards the eventual abandonment…” of such harsh treatment by the North Vietnamese.
Yet in McCain’s own words just four days after being captured, he admits he violated the U.S. Code of Conduct by telling his captors “O.K, I’ll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital.”
A Vietnam vet detractor says, “He received the nation’s third highest award, the Silver Star, for treason. He provided aid and comfort to the enemy!”
The rest of his valor awards – issued automatically every year while he was a POW – read much like the Silver Star. More boilerplate often repeating the exact same words. An example: “By his heroic endeavors, exceptional skill, and devotion to duty, he reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the Naval Service and the United States Armed Forces.”
Yet McCain’s conduct while a POW negates these glowing comments. The facts are that he signed a confession and declared himself a “black criminal who performed deeds of an air pirate.” This statement and other interviews he gave to the Communist press were used as propaganda to fan the flames of the anti-war movement.[/quote]
But, then Hackworth, as the most highly decorated human being who has worn an American uniform in recent memory, may have high standards. But what does he think about McCain’s decision to stay?
So, when McCain returns to the United States and find his wife who honorably waited for him for all those years crippled and a couple of inches shorter from a car accident, did he love her back? Nope. McCain started chasing a young beer heiress around receptions. I personally think McCain served honorably but that when he got back he behaved like a sneaky little shit.
And now that he’s an old man who can’t remember who the Sunnis and Shi’ites are 5-1/2 years into the war in Iraq, I think he’s a senile old shit.
I have no idea if McCain is a senile old shit or not, but his family DOES make very good oven chips. However, if this is true [quote]Kerry served honorably aboard a destroyer off the coast of Vietnam and then left the blue-water navy to go into the swift boats for a second tour. Giving up being an ice-cream eater to go into the highly dangerous brown-water navy, running up and down rivers in a tiny boat made of thin aluminum is, in itself, enough to make him a war hero in my eyes. [/quote] then goddamn right he’s a man indeed. A hero? Who knows? But shit, those guys knew what they were getting into when they opted to go upstream in a wee tiny boat to get shot at. Limp-wristed ponces need not apply.
Please stop trying to make this about me. Its not about me. I simply don’t think Kerry is a war hero. I have not stated that he is a coward. In fact, I have stated that he was brave. That’s it. We don’t have to all agree that Kerry was a war hero. I think its enough to agree that he was brave.
Gao,
I haven’t commented on Kerry’s medals… I haven’t stated that he didn’t deserve the medals. I have only compared/contrasted Kerry’s decision to exit the war when the opportunity permitted him to do so with McCain’s decision to remain a POW and be subjected to further and continuing torture when he was given an opportunity to be released.
In the end, I think TM has a double-standard on this. He doesn’t like Kerry’s war wounds (calling them “mere scratches”), he doesn’t like the normal American standards for rewarding heroism (saying Kerry’s not a “hero”) … and yet he considers McCain a “hero”. Kerry didn’t offer up material information to the enemy just to get medical treatment for himself, and Kerry never made radio broadcasts for his North Vietnamese masters calling himself a “black pirate of the jungle-clogged streams of Southeast Asia” (although actually that’s a kinda cool nickname if it weren’t being used as part of commie propaganda).
What might hurt McCain in being considered a “hero” is the fact that he and Palin have been running ads in which they take Obama to task for having supported legislation that would have helped protect kids from child molesters. Obama had supported legislation that would have led to age-appropriate education for young kids about what kind of touching is inappropriate and what to do to get help. Although I often think that it’s important for parents to be involved in teaching older kids about the facts of life, if you’re trying to protect against child molestation obviously that method misses the kids being molested within their own family. I figure McCain-Palin have the following reasons for being against this kind of education:
1. Republicans Are Loyal to their Own: Mark Foley was able to survive for years in the House of Representatives under the protection of Hastert and other top Republicans who knew all about the predatory ways he was seeking to pound the little cabooses of the boys serving as pages in Congress. What better way to “stick by your friends” than to ensure a ready supply of unprepared little children ready to be prodded and groped by guys like Mark Foley, Ted Klaudt and Deal Hudson (now serving the McCain campaign as an advisor on, presumably, how to take young kids who come to you for counseling, get them drunk, and then f*ck them).
2. Republicans Save Money by Saving Money: We’ve seen how well Bush did at saving on VA medical costs, interest-free college loans and other veteran service bonuses by simply making the decision to send our troops to war without adequate body and humvee armor. Well, following on Sarah Palin’s Wasilla town policy of making sure that rape victims pay for their own “rape kits” (i.e., the medical exams used after a rape to try to collect evidence on the case), it’s no wonder that McCain-Palin are aghast at the possible resources it would cost in medical exams, police and prosecutor hours, as well as court time if small children actually knew they were being abused and how to report it to the authorities. If McCain-Palin want to be purely consistent on this, within the first 100 days in office, they’ll make sure that legislation is signed that children cannot report any allegations of sexual abuse unless they are willing to immediately pay the usual $400 to 1,200 that these post-rape medical exams cost … in cash, on the spot.
But probably the most likely reason that McCain doesn’t want to see kids educated with information to protect themselves against molesters is that he is a senile, old shit whose time has come and gone. If he gets elected, we’ll have “Diaper Tuesdays” in which all Americans will have to wear Depends undergarments in solidarity with people of McCain’s demographic.
Kerry said that his wounds were not serious. He missed no work due to two of the wounds and he missed two days due to the third wound. Kerry himself has stated that the wounds were not at all serious. I believe him.
So, the only way to be a “hero” in your eyes is to have shoulder injuries like McCain and to be a Republican? What kind of basis is that for determining who deserves to be a hero or not?!? Kerry went back in a frickin’ tinfoil powerboat into enemy fire to rescue a green beret who had been blasted off into the water. He also ran ashore and shot a VC soldier who had an armed B-40 rocket launcher, saving the life of his crew – Kerry was in the thick of things in a boat so small you could actually beach it and run ashore after Vietcong. But he’s somehow less worthy than McCain, who was offering the North Vietnamese material info to get better medical care for himself.
But that’s OK. A couple of years ago, I’d have been glad to say McCain is a hero. But now that I see him attacking Obama for having supported a bill to protect small kids from sexual predators, I have to say McCain’s either mean, nuts or senile. I’m betting on senile.
I haven’t commented on Kerry’s medals… I haven’t stated that he didn’t deserve the medals.[/quote]
Yes you have. You stated that Kerry’s wounds were “mere scratches.” As Purple Hearts are not awarded for mere scratches, you are indirectly stating that his medals were undeserved, which contradicts Kerry’s military medical records and the position of the Navy itself. It’s true that his wounds were not severe, but that’s irrelevant, since the majority of Purple Hearts are not awarded for severe injuries. Your other beef is that Kerry himself wrote about the nature of his own injuries. Well of course he did, he was the skipper. He was required to report on the outcome of each mission, including any injuries, fatalities, or loss of assets. However, the OPH is not awarded until the injuries are reported from the attending physician to the CO or other senior officers delegated with the proper authority to present the OPH. That was the procedure then and it’s the procedure now, and the Navy found that this procedure was followed.
Does it really matter which one was “more” of a hero? As HGC already noted, the military already has a method for recognizing heroism above and beyond the call of duty – in the form of medals and commendations. Kerry received the Bronze Star with cluster and the Silver Star, and three OPHs. All of his men, his senior officers (who made notations in his official record), and the Navy Inspector General, confirmed that these medals were deserved and in general praised Kerry’s heroism. The only contradictory reports come from sailors who were hundreds of yards away on the opposite side of the river, and who, by an amazing coincidence, were funded by Republican propagandists and said nary a word until Kerry ran for POTUS. Which do you think is the more objective source?
To address your point, that Kerry did not volunteer for continuing service after he was automatically scheduled to be cycled out of theatre while McCain refused to leave the POW camp because there were other POWs who had been their longer, I can only say that I think the distinction is moot given Kerry’s already proven heroism. I no more blame Kerry for not volunteering to stay than I blame McCain for giving up information for medical treatment. Is McCain “more” of a hero on some quantifiable scale of heroism? Perhaps so. But again, I don’t see any purpose of making the distinction.
[quote=“mofangongren”] 1. Republicans Are Loyal to their Own: Mark Foley was able to survive for years in the House of Representatives under the protection of Hastert and other top Republicans who knew all about the predatory ways he was seeking to pound the little cabooses of the boys serving as pages in Congress. What better way to “stick by your friends” than to ensure a ready supply of unprepared little children ready to be prodded and groped by guys like Mark Foley, Ted Klaudt and Deal Hudson (now serving the McCain campaign as an advisor on, presumably, how to take young kids who come to you for counseling, get them drunk, and then f*ck them).[/quote]
Do you get all of your information from leftist websites, or are you deliberately distorting the truth? None of the investigations have determined that Foley had sex with little boys. The worst that he did was to send erotic IMs to pages, the youngest of which was 16. Foley did have sex with men, but grown men, ex-pages who became of the age of consent. He didn’t get anyone drunk and rape them. He shared wine and a pizza with a 21-year old ex-page and had sex with him. No one is claiming that anything unethical occurred in that instance, so why bring it up?
Hastert has given contradictory accounts, but his office has admitted that his senior staffers were aware of Foley’s predilection towards young men in November 2005, several months prior to the story breaking in September 2006. It is highly doubtful that Hastert was not made aware, given that he lives with two of his senior staffers (insert joke here). But Hastert wasn’t protecting a predator, he was protecting a gay man who likes to have sex with other gay men.
Oh I can. In the case of Tigerman it;s called baiting, but in the case of T Boone Pickens, et al, it’s called political expedience, and it’s precisely this kind of bullshit that drives contempt and derision for the American political system and it’s institutions.
The first debate between Obama and McCain is coming up this Friday. McCain must prove that his mind is younger than it currently seems, while Obama must prove he is older than his resume currently suggests.
I think McCain can hold his own. He does have a good sense of humor and he is quick. It would be to Obama’s great disadvantage to underestimate him. Let’s hope it’s a debate about issues and not accusations back and forth.