Go ahead, insult us

[cloasters]

At this year's Republican National Convention, the Band-Aid purple heart worn by around two hundred delegates is the last straw. Because the current administration has few accomplishments to run on, it tears down the Democratic nominee with a torrent of lies and mis-quotations.

Listen up, Bush and company: Your band-aid stunt insulted millions of veterans who know that a Purple Heart means something. First of all, you don't want to earn this combat medal! Secondly: Some soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen and Coast Guard people earn this medal for minor wounds. Thirdly, some men and women in combat who deserve this medal don't receive one.

It's safe to assume that John Kerry's three Purple Hearts mean that he was wounded in a combat zone.

Allow me to remind Mr president and his supporters that he never came within 6000 miles of a combat zone while he wore the uniform of the United States. So kindly campaign on your merits, sir.

[alexkerhead]

I have to agree with you, that was a very untasteful thing to do..
AND another reason to vote John Kerry..
Bush is the one who told 12 major lies to cover up the real reasons for going to iraq.
my Opinion..

[surlyjoe]

That was a kick in the nads to ALL vetran's. WTF were they thinking?

[SteveI]

Originally Posted by surlyjoe

That was a kick in the nads to ALL vetran's. WTF were they thinking?

The intent was not to insult veterans, but kerry himself. The belief is that kerry's purple hearts are the real insult to veterans... eg. they were awarded improperly.

[Staz]

John Kerry's Purple Hearts
Purple Heart Number One:
The Boston Globe - June 6, 2003 -- Kerry experienced his first intense combat action on Dec. 2, 1968, when he "semi-volunteered for, was semi-drafted" for a risky covert mission in which he essentially was supposed to "flush out" the enemy, using a little Boston Whaler named "Batman." A larger backup craft was called "Robin."
Unfortunately, Robin had engine trouble, and Batman's exit was delayed until the boats could depart in unison. The Batman crew encountered some Viet Cong, engaged in a firefight, and Kerry was slightly wounded on his arm, earning his first Purple Heart on his first day of serious action.
"It was not a very serious wound at all," recalled William Schachte, who oversaw the mission and went on to become a rear admiral.
Purple Heart Number Two:
The Boston Globe - June 6, 2003 -- On Feb. 20, 1969, Kerry earned his second Purple Heart after sustaining a shrapnel wound in his left thigh. According to a previously unreported Navy report on the battle, a two-boat patrol spotted three men on a riverbank who were wearing black pajamas and running and engaged them in a firefight. While not criticizing this engagement, the Navy report did challenge the decision of unnamed skippers to fire at other "targets of opportunity" in the area.
"Area seemed extremely prosperous and open to psyops action, minimum number of defensive and no offensive bunkers detected," the report said. The naval official who wrote the report concluded: "Future missions in this area should be oriented toward psyops rather than destruction."
The destruction included 40 sampans, 10 hut-style hootches, three bunkers, and 5,000 pounds of rice. The crews from two swift boats had expended more than 14,000 rounds of.50-caliber ammunition. No enemy casualties were reported.
Purple Heart Number Three
The Boston Globe June 6, 2003 --. . . On March 13, 1969, a mine detonated near Kerry's boat, wounding Kerry in the right arm, according to the citation written by [Navy Admiral Elmo "Bud"] Zumwalt. Guerrillas started firing on the boats from the shoreline. Kerry then realized that he had lost overboard a Green Beret who is identified only as "Rassman."
"The man was receiving sniper fire from both banks," according to Kerry's Bronze Star citation from that day. "Lt. Kerry directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire, while from an exposed position on the bow, his arm bleeding and in pain, with disregard for his personal safety, he pulled the man aboard. Lt. Kerry then directed his boat to return and assist the other damaged craft and towed the boat to safety. Lt. Kerry's calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire were in keeping with the highest traditions of the US Naval Service," Zumwalt's citation said.
Home Free:
The Boston Globe June 6, 2003 -- Kerry had been wounded three times and received three Purple Hearts. Asked about the severity of the wounds, Kerry said that one of them cost him about two days of service, and that the other two did not interrupt his duty. "Walking wounded," as Kerry put it. A shrapnel wound in his left arm gave Kerry pain for years. Kerry declined a request from the Globe to sign a waiver authorizing the release of military documents that are covered under the Privacy Act and that might shed more light on the extent of the treatment Kerry needed as a result of the wounds.
"There were an awful lot of Purple Hearts -- from shrapnel, some of those might have been M-40 grenades," said [George] Elliott, Kerry's commanding officer. "The Purple Hearts were coming down in boxes. Kerry, he had three Purple Hearts. None of them took him off duty. Not to belittle it, that was more the rule than the exception."
The Boston Globe - June 6, 2003 -- . . . The National Archives provided the Globe with a Navy "instruction" document that formed the basis for Kerry's request. The instruction, titled 1300.39, says that a Naval officer who requires hospitalization on two separate occasions, or who receives three wounds "regardless of the nature of the wounds," can ask a superior officer to request a reassignment. The instruction makes clear the reassignment is not automatic. It says that the reassignment "will be determined after consideration of his physical classification for duty and on an individual basis."
Because Kerry's wounds were not considered serious, his reassignment appears to have been made on an individual basis.
Moreover, the instruction makes clear that Kerry could have asked that any reassignment be waived.
The bottom line is that Kerry could have remained but he chose to seek an early transfer . . .

Kerry Purple Heart Doc Speaks Out
The medical description of his first wound.

By Byron York

Some critics of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry have questioned the circumstances surrounding the first of three Purple Hearts Kerry won in Vietnam. Those critics, among them some of Kerry's fellow veterans, have suggested that a wound suffered by Kerry in December 1968 may have made him technically eligible for a Purple Heart but was not severe enough to warrant serious consideration, even for a decoration that was handed out by the thousands. Whatever the case, Kerry was awarded the Purple Heart, and, along with two others he won later, it allowed him to request to leave Vietnam before his tour of duty was finished.

Kerry was treated for the wound at a medical facility in Cam Ranh Bay. The doctor who treated Kerry, Louis Letson, is today a retired general practitioner in Alabama. Letson says he remembers his brief encounter with Kerry 35 years ago because "some of his crewmen related that Lt. Kerry had told them that he would be the next JFK from Massachusetts." Letson says that last year, as the Democratic campaign began to heat up, he told friends that he remembered treating one of the candidates many years ago. In response to their questions, Letson says, he wrote down his recollections of the time. (Letson says he has had no contacts with anyone from the Bush campaign or the Republican party.) What follows is Letson's memory, as he wrote it.

I have a very clear memory of an incident which occurred while I was the Medical Officer at Naval Support Facility, Cam Ranh Bay.

John Kerry was a (jg), the OinC or skipper of a Swift boat, newly arrived in Vietnam. On the night of December 2, he was on patrol north of Cam Ranh, up near Nha Trang area. The next day he came to sick bay, the medical facility, for treatment of a wound that had occurred that night.

The story he told was different from what his crewmen had to say about that night. According to Kerry, they had been engaged in a fire fight, receiving small arms fire from on shore. He said that his injury resulted from this enemy action.

Some of his crew confided that they did not receive any fire from shore, but that Kerry had fired a mortar round at close range to some rocks on shore. The crewman thought that the injury was caused by a fragment ricocheting from that mortar round when it struck the rocks.

That seemed to fit the injury which I treated.

What I saw was a small piece of metal sticking very superficially in the skin of Kerry's arm. The metal fragment measured about 1 cm. in length and was about 2 or 3 mm in diameter. It certainly did not look like a round from a rifle.

I simply removed the piece of metal by lifting it out of the skin with forceps. I doubt that it penetrated more than 3 or 4 mm. It did not require probing to find it, did not require any anesthesia to remove it, and did not require any sutures to close the wound.

The wound was covered with a bandaid.

Not [sic] other injuries were reported and I do not recall that there was any reported damage to the boat.

I think that unless Kerry comes out and makes public his medical records we will continue to see things like this. It is not meant as an insult to those who served but instead to those who had metal splinters removed and then opted to go home after only 4 months.

I personally don't think Kerry was trying to get medals to make himself look good, but instead he was trying to go home and he found a more effective way than corperal Klinger did.

[robbie]

Originally Posted by alexkerhead

I have to agree with you, that was a very untasteful thing to do..

Don't they have a Gentalmens agreement NOT to campain during a convention? I don't remember seeing Bush During the DNC's convention on TV.
Rob

[SteveI]

Thanks Staz, good read.
Unfortunately, the bottom line is that Kerry himself wants to keep the details secret, whether out of humility or self protection depends on who you talk to...

I could start insulting BOTH parties at this moment, but I won't.

[warp1]

As a Veteran, I personally am more insulted by Kerry. His antics during and following the war are what I consider distasteful. I dont think his military service is beneficial to his campaign, except on the surface.

[cloasters]

Kerry waited until the RNC was finished in New York before resuming his election campaign. If his opposition wasn't continuously calling the character of his combat service in Viet-Nam into question, he wouldn't need to keep addressing this three decade old issue.

Mr Bush took an avenue only open to the high-born to avoid service in the active military during our sojourn into South East Asia. The simple fact is this: Kerry volunteered for combat duty in Viet-Nam and performed it. While John Kerry's family doesn't have the high status of the Bush Family, he also may have been able to sit out the Viet-Nam War in a National Guard or Reserve unit. Mr Bush took steps to stay far away from any chance of being shot at in Viet-Nam. He doesn't have a leg to stand on to question Mr Kerry's character of service to his country.

I respect Senator Kerry's decision to protest the character of our involvement in South East Asia after his service in Viet-Nam. It requires the courage of moral clarity to stand in front of war supporters and the people who simply don't care and say "Stop doing this."

While Mr Bush was missing from the rolls of the Texas Air National Guard and the Alabama Air National Guard, I was in Viet-Nam in the US Army. The conclusion that we were not helping the Viet-Namese was inescapable.

[robbie]

Acctually I think I heard him speak on Tues or Wed, and then at Midnight on Thurs (after they were over) I have no problem with Senator Kerry servering in Nam. I just hate to be reminded of it every 5 mins. I HIGHLY RESPECT ANYONE who has servered. I think this country OWE'S our vet's a great deal and we should bend over backwards for them. But with that, it shouldn't be the ONLY reason to run for Prez.

There MUST be a war on Terror. WE (the USA) must do something to stop the happenings of 9-11. What did Clinton do when the WTC was attacted the first time? What did he do when the Cole was attacted? I DON'T want a president that will say "I'll leave it up to the UN to deal with it" As far as I can tell (and I'm probably a little niave in this) the UN doesn't do much. How many times did they tell Sadam to stop. How many resolutions did they pass? Maybe at resolution number 57 they were planning on doing something?!?!? or was it resolution number 87? 21? 34? maybe 15? maybe they had to tell him one last time, after they told him one last time. I just won't vote for Kerry because I don't see how's he's going to protect my children. I'm voting for Bush because I think he will do something about it. And yes I think we are in IRAQ for the oil. Simple FACT that America DEPENDS on it. Sorry I'll stop ranting.
Rob

[alexkerhead]

Shoot, if I had the chance to leave a "war"(more like mascarade) from a few splinters I would too, but that is me..
I hate to see veterans get cut down if they left for a smaller reason than others..
oh jezz, I am going to try and keep myself from writing a 15 paragraph post and annoying everyone..