"The New Soldier"

A book by John Kerry.

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/in...pic=NewSoldier

Happy reading to all the Kerry voters here.

I wonder why he wouldn't allow a reprinting?

Well, no...actually I don't wonder that at all; the "why" of it is quite clear.

What do you, personally find offensive about this book..if you do?

He stood up for something he believed in.

Have you never done this?

Surely, this is what your country is all about...whether you personally believe it is of course upto you. However, I feel you have no right to judge others that do this...

Over time, your outlook changes too... what you believed when you were 25, is not necessarily the same thing you'd believe in now.

In the UK there used to be a saying, when the Labour Party was actually a socialist party, and the Tories werent as Right Wing....

"If you dont vote Labour when your 18 you havent got a heart; If you still vote Labour when your 50 you havent got a Brain"

The Parties have changed, and the expression means nothing now, in my humble opinion...at least in terms of UK politics... however the meaning is obvious.

There you are. I was about to organize a search party to see if we could find you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

He stood up for something he believed in.

Have you never done this?

Over time, your outlook changes too... what you believed when you were 25, is not necessarily the same thing you'd believe in now.

---

I do it all the time, Rat, and I'm doing it right now.

The relevant point here is that if indeed Kerry's beliefs have changed, there is nothing in his campaign rhetoric or his entire political career that refutes it (please spare me his paltry commentary about the brashness of youth); his entire Senate record-such as it he can be said to have accumulated one-is merely a continuance of his record of inane pacifism.

He would be worse even than Jimmy Carter.

Carter can at least pound nails; Kerry should pound sand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

He would be worse even than Jimmy Carter.

---

He may well be.

However, thats still a vast improvement on the present management ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

He may well be.

However, thats still a vast improvement on the present management ;)

---

I'm sure you believe that, having not experienced the horror of Jimmy Carter as your Commander-in-Chief.

The man was unutterably inept.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

I'm sure you believe that, having not experienced the horror of Jimmy Carter as your Commander-in-Chief.

The man was unutterably inept.

---

As is Bush.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

As is Bush.

---

C'mon, B, you can do better than that.

Are you tired or something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

C'mon, B, you can do better than that.

Are you tired or something?

---

Although sometimes the obvious answer is the right one.

Neither have particularly charmed the airwaves with their debating techniques.

Edit: Was Carter really so bad? *tiptoes quietly away* :shifty:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

C'mon, B, you can do better than that.

Are you tired or something?

---

No, I really meant it.

There is nary a positive action that has been done in his years as President.

When asked to cite such there is avoidance of the issue.
:dry:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley

I believe there has been plenty of positive action. The question is whether it was the appropriate action.

---

Okay name some positive actions. :huh:

If you honestly want positive actions, look up his website at what he thinks he did...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinningfreemanny

If you honestly want positive actions, look up his website at what he thinks he did...

---

Why have a forum manny?

I didn't ask for what he thinks he did.

With this being a forum I was looking for our member's opinions and facts. :dry:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley

Perhaps he felt that your actions in Vietnam were unjust and felt obliged to say this.

I would have thought this was a good thing.

---

Surely-

But if one leaps from that stance into the Presidential arena, one had best be prepared to defend, or, at the very least, explain one's actions, and also to forego any whining at relevent questions.

Im sure he said something about this...

Brashness of youth etc...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

Over time, your outlook changes too... what you believed when you were 25, is not necessarily the same thing you'd believe in now.

---

I have to agree here especially in the case of Kerry. When he came back from Vietnam he demonstrated with Jane Fonda against the war. He even testified in congress opposing the war in Vietnam. In one of his debates when he was referring to "the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time" he said he would have the UN involved in the training of Iraqi troops. Has he forgotten the fact that this very thing is what got us in Vietnam in the first place and 50,000 young soldiers later we walked away, having accomplishing absolutely nothing, not even removing Ho Chi Min from power. Only to have the people we were fighting to keep a democracy be over ran by the North Vietnamese, and put under communist rule. the very thing we had spent over 10 years fighting against.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudSeeder

I have to agree here especially in the case of Kerry. When he came back from Vietnam he demonstrated with Jane Fonda against the war. He even testified in congress opposing the war in Vietnam. In one of his debates when he was referring to "the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time" he said he would have the UN involved in the training of Iraqi troops. Has he forgotten the fact that this very thing is what got us in Vietnam in the first place and 50,000 young soldiers later we walked away, having accomplishing absolutely nothing, not even removing Ho Chi Min from power. Only to have the people we were fighting to keep a democracy be over ran by the North Vietnamese, and put under communist rule. the very thing we had spent over 10 years fighting against.

---

Bottomline:

We weren't supposed to be there.
Pick your battles carefully.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudSeeder

I have to agree here especially in the case of Kerry. When he came back from Vietnam he demonstrated with Jane Fonda against the war. He even testified in congress opposing the war in Vietnam. In one of his debates when he was referring to "the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time" he said he would have the UN involved in the training of Iraqi troops. Has he forgotten the fact that this very thing is what got us in Vietnam in the first place and 50,000 young soldiers later we walked away, having accomplishing absolutely nothing, not even removing Ho Chi Min from power. Only to have the people we were fighting to keep a democracy be over ran by the North Vietnamese, and put under communist rule. the very thing we had spent over 10 years fighting against.

---

I never understood why you were there in the 1st place...

A country that had a war for Independance, fighting to keep another country a European Colony... Hypocracy :rolleyes:


As to changing your mind, another example is GW Bush, who was for the Vietnam War, but a couple of months later signed a paper NOT volunteering for oversea's,.... Like i said, a little older, and changed his mind... :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

Bottomline:

We weren't supposed to be there.
Pick your battles carefully.

---

My point exactly, yet Kerry is proposing the exact foreign policy that put us there in the first place.
Korea: entered by Harry Truman (dem) at the request of UN (still there)
Vietnam: entered by John Kennedy (dem) at the request of UN withdrawn by Richard Nixon (rep)
Bosnia: Entered by Bill Clinton (dem) at the request of UN (still there)
Iraq: Entered by George Bush (rep) withdrawn by George Bush
Afghanistan: Entered by George W. Bush (rep) (still there) (not finished)
Iraq: Entered by George W. Bush (rep) (still there) (not finished)
We were in Korea (fighting) for over 3 years, and we were in Vietnam (fighting) for over 10 years. (helping France I might add here). We have been in Iraq (fighting) for 19 months, elections have been held in Afghanistan, are scheduled for January in Iraq. What are we supposed to do, just withdraw, leaving yet another war unfinished? True there were no WMD found, but when Congress voted overwhelmingly to go to Iraq even John Kerry thought there were, and he voted to go

Congress voted to give Boo!sh the AUTHORITY, as Commander in Chief..cough, choke. I don't think they expected him to turn around and rush into Iraq. They expected inspections to continue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudSeeder

We have been in Iraq (fighting) for 19 months, elections have been held in Afghanistan, are scheduled for January in Iraq. What are we supposed to do, just withdraw, leaving yet another war unfinished? True there were no WMD found, but when Congress voted overwhelmingly to go to Iraq even John Kerry thought there were, and he voted to go

---

Neither Kerry or Bush are suggesting pulling out at this stage....Kerry said something about if you break the pot you own it...It may have been wrong to go in but as we have we have a responsibility to work to get the peace before we withdraw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudSeeder

My point exactly, yet Kerry is proposing the exact foreign policy that put us there in the first place.
Korea: entered by Harry Truman (dem) at the request of UN (still there)
Vietnam: entered by John Kennedy (dem) at the request of UN withdrawn by Richard Nixon (rep)
Bosnia: Entered by Bill Clinton (dem) at the request of UN (still there)
Iraq: Entered by George Bush (rep) withdrawn by George Bush
Afghanistan: Entered by George W. Bush (rep) (still there) (not finished)
Iraq: Entered by George W. Bush (rep) (still there) (not finished)
We were in Korea (fighting) for over 3 years, and we were in Vietnam (fighting) for over 10 years. (helping France I might add here). We have been in Iraq (fighting) for 19 months, elections have been held in Afghanistan, are scheduled for January in Iraq. What are we supposed to do, just withdraw, leaving yet another war unfinished? True there were no WMD found, but when Congress voted overwhelmingly to go to Iraq even John Kerry thought there were, and he voted to go

---

What is Kerry proposing? :huh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

What is Kerry proposing? :huh:

---

He thinks we should have the UN involved in training troops!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudSeeder

He thinks we should have the UN involved in training troops!

---

There are lots of countries involved in Training Iraqi troops, that arent and wont go into Iraq. eg: Germany

Why not let UN have control? At least there'd be standardisation then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthie

Congress voted to give Boo!sh the AUTHORITY, as Commander in Chief..cough, choke. I don't think they expected him to turn around and rush into Iraq. They expected inspections to continue.

---

Congress voted to give Bush the authority to use force in Iraq, and when he uses it, Kerry (who voted for it) cries foul??!!?

I'm having difficulty following the logic of your reasoning/conclusion here.

You act as if Bush asked for money for education and then went behind Congress' back and used it to go into Iraq.

If your child asks your permission to buy a candy bar (which you are certainly aware may rot his/her teeth), and when you grant it, proceeds to purchase and eat a candy bar, do you petition the public for a new child, based upon feelings of betrayal?

I must say you have a novel way of thinking; I'm afraid I shall never learn your method, and hereby beg you to stay so that you might explain such circuitous and convoluted thoughts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Congress voted to give Bush the authority to use force in Iraq, and when he uses it, Kerry (who voted for it) cries foul??!!?

I'm having difficulty following the logic of your reasoning/conclusion here.

You act as if Bush asked for money for education and then went behind Congress' back and used it to go into Iraq.

If your child asks your permission to buy a candy bar (which you are certainly aware may rot his/her teeth), and when you grant it, proceeds to purchase and eat a candy bar, do you petition the public for a new child, based upon feelings of betrayal?

I must say you have a novel way of thinking; I'm afraid I shall never learn your method, and hereby beg you to stay so that you might explain such circuitous and convoluted thoughts.

---

Of course you don't understand my way of thinking. The vote was to give Bush the authority AFTER everything was tried, in terms of resolving the situation. That's a good example you use of Bush taking money allocated for one thing and doing something else with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthie

The vote was to give Bush the authority AFTER everything was tried, in terms of resolving the situation.

---

Okay.

What precisely is left, "AFTER everything was tried"?

Twelve years and umpteen resolutions?

Congress AND Kerry knew exactly what they were voting for, ruthie.

I am astounded Kerry actually believes people buy or follow his "logic"; if he actually believes what he says, he is the most naive pol to ever float down the pike, and also the most disingenuous for trying to explain it away.

I will leave aside the fact of your wholesale purchase of this nonsense, and take this opportunity to apologize for posting without providing the requisite and irrelevent "link".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Okay.

What precisely is left, "AFTER everything was tried"?

Twelve years and umpteen resolutions?

Congress AND Kerry knew exactly what they were voting for, ruthie.

I am astounded Kerry actually believes people buy or follow his "logic"; if he actually believes what he says, he is the most naive pol to ever float down the pike, and also the most disingenuous for trying to explain it away.

I will leave aside the fact of your wholesale purchase of this nonsense, and take this opportunity to apologize for posting without providing the requisite and irrelevent "link".

---

I don't think enough was done. Bush had an agenda as far as Iraq goes. Kerry is not the only politician to say they believed inspectors were going to be allowed to finish their job...they were not. There are Republicans that agree with that sentiment. Bush never intended to let them finish. i believe he knew there were no weapons, and I also believe he lied all the way through his presidincy..be it from leaking CIA operative's name to the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. We are at war in Iraq, killing uncountable numbers of civilians. How many times are they going to bomb Fallujah?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Okay.

What precisely is left, "AFTER everything was tried"?

Twelve years and umpteen resolutions?

---

:) Very few weapons of mass destruction?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Okay.

What precisely is left, "AFTER everything was tried"?

Twelve years and umpteen resolutions?

Congress AND Kerry knew exactly what they were voting for, ruthie.

I am astounded Kerry actually believes people buy or follow his "logic"; if he actually believes what he says, he is the most naive pol to ever float down the pike, and also the most disingenuous for trying to explain it away.

I will leave aside the fact of your wholesale purchase of this nonsense, and take this opportunity to apologize for posting without providing the requisite and irrelevent "link".

---

Correct me if im wrong...

The UN inspectors and the Iraqi Survey Team both said he'd disarmed...

The British Government has officially appologised to the British People, saying they now acknowledge this...

So, as the reason was mute... what could Saddam do to appease Bush/Blaire?

Buy some, so he could destroy them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Congress voted to give Bush the authority to use force in Iraq, and when he uses it, Kerry (who voted for it) cries foul??!!?

I'm having difficulty following the logic of your reasoning/conclusion here.

You act as if Bush asked for money for education and then went behind Congress' back and used it to go into Iraq.

If your child asks your permission to buy a candy bar (which you are certainly aware may rot his/her teeth), and when you grant it, proceeds to purchase and eat a candy bar, do you petition the public for a new child, based upon feelings of betrayal?

I must say you have a novel way of thinking; I'm afraid I shall never learn your method, and hereby beg you to stay so that you might explain such circuitous and convoluted thoughts.

---

I believe Kerry fucked up actually. I've seen him describe Saddam as a grave threat and yes he did vote for the war.

but...

I don't think Bush learned a damn thing from this and Kerry has. That makes Bush a fool.
Add to that he takes the responsiblity since he is President.

He can go around saying, "Well you guys told me I could shoot him." :(

Bush sold it and congress bought it.

If a defective product is sold then the seller bares responsibilty.

"
I believe Kerry fucked up actually. I've seen him describe Saddam as a grave threat and yes he did vote for the war.

but..."

I would agree. I was disgusted with everyone that voted for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley

The problem with democracy is that you get what you vote for. Unfortunately, for most people they get what someone else voted for, because they can't be arsed doing it themself.

President Bush was elected as the leader of the USA, he was given the authority to take what action he saw fit to deal with certain situations. He has used his judgment and the counsel of his advisors to do this.

That's the way it works. If you're not happy about it then get off your arse and vote the next time.

---

Uhh yeah whatever.

The passwords are:

That goes without saying

...for lack of profundity. :dry: