Kerry and his Vietnam service strategy

arkansasnews.com ^ | Sunday, Feb 22, 2004 | David Sanders

[Destro]

Kerry and his Vietnam service strategy

Sunday, Feb 22, 2004

By David Sanders

"We're a little older and a little grayer, but we still know how to fight for our country." -John Kerry, 2004.

John Kerry's political strategy to play up his service in Vietnam was and is a brilliant tactic to use in the Democratic presidential primaries. Six months ago Democrats feared that they would not be able to stand toe-to-toe on the issues of defense and protecting the homeland.

At every campaign stop, urging a debate with President George W. Bush on matters of national security, Kerry exclaims, "Bring it on." Kerry's talk about his days in Vietnam and the subsequent allegations that Bush missed a few weekends in the National Guard have given Democrats solace and now they believe the front-runner when he says he welcomes a debate with Bush.

The Kerry strategy may be shortsighted in the long run. In campaigns, one will speak of a military record to give voters some idea of how one would perform as president.

Kerry's bravery displayed on the battlefield should not be dismissed; however, there remains the untold story of how he came home protesting the Vietnam War and throwing away his ribbons - he says he kept his medals. Understandably, Kerry the war protester doesn't fit into the campaign plan.

What have more than two decades in the U.S. Senate revealed about Kerry? Does his record fit more with a decorated war hero who believes in the strength of the United States or does it have more in common with a war protester who wanted to cut the role and strength of the U.S. military?

As early as 1972, while running for Congress, Kerry claimed he would vote against military appropriations. In 1984, while campaigning for the U.S. Senate, Kerry advocated numerous defense cuts just at a time when President Reagan was following through on his pledge to rebuild and modernize the U.S. military. Peace through strength was not Kerry's position.

At the height of the Cold War he advocated canceling both the B-1 and B-2 stealth bomber programs and claimed reductions were needed in the Tomahawk cruise missile and F-16 fighter jet programs.

In the 1990s, Kerry's record on the military and intelligence issues shows his willingness to hack away. Kerry voted and introduced legislation numerous times to cut Defense Department appropriations.

Kerry and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, supported an amendment in 1996 "to freeze defense spending for the next seven years and transfer the $34.8 billion in savings to education and job training." Kerry cast other votes to halt defense spending and divert those funds to social programs at home.

Kerry's record reveals he hasn't been a friend to the intelligence community he now advocates. Throughout the last decade Kerry introduced legislation to cut funding from the intelligence budget.

In 1994, Kerry began his effort to cut $1 billion from the intelligence budgets of the National Foreign Intelligence Program and from the Tactical Intelligence Program budgets. The NFIP cuts Kerry proposed were broad-ranging reductions in the overall mission of the Central Intelligence Agency; however, the cuts from Tactical Intelligence would have cut a program that provides intelligence support for American commanders and soldiers on the ground.

One year later, Kerry introduced more legislation to cut $1.3 billion from the overall intelligence budget and freeze spending. Fortunately, no one was willing to sign on as a co-sponsor. His bill never made it to the Senate floor for a vote.

Kerry's willingness to play up his war record may lead some to believe that he has always been a supporter of the defense and intelligence communities. His record, in fact, tells a different story. Kerry appears to have less in common with his fighting days and more in common with his protesting days.

------

David Sanders writes twice weekly for the Arkansas News Bureau in Little Rock. His e-mail address is DavidJSanders@aol.com.

[Destro]

A conservative finally gets it! The way to beat Kerry is not to challenge his war record but to challenged his post war life where he made the wrong choices. Even in protesting the war, which is acceptable was done in an unacceptable manner.

Of course pointing this out gets me flamed no end, but someone has to do it.

[FairOpinion]

When you say it this way, most will agree with you.

Your earlier comments, while you may not have intended them that way, gave a different impression.

People ARE focusing on his voting record and his war protest.

But since he keeps bragging about his war record, it is legitimate to ask him to release those records.

On occasion I also said, that we need to focus on Kerry today, for example, we can talk about what he said about the UN in 1971, but then quote him on what he said recently and show that he still thinks we should subordinate our sovereignity to the UN.

[Destro]

It is how I have always put it. But I guess peopel get upset when someone plays devil's advocate over an issue they think they scored a touchdown on.

[Poohbah]

But did you know that Kerry served in Vietnam? :o)

On a more serious note, did you know that Kerry is a self-confessed war criminal? (No, I'm not confusing him with former Senator Bob Kerrey of Nebraska--Kerry copped to war crimes on national television in 1971.)

Do we really want to elect a guy who can be hauled in front of the International Criminal Court by the Vietnamese?

[FairOpinion]

In any case, this article was a good find!

[moodyskeptic]

It appears the democrat party finally found a "baby killer" it can love.

[FairOpinion]

We definitely need to pointing out these types of things:

"In 1994, Kerry began his effort to cut $1 billion from the intelligence budgets of the National Foreign Intelligence Program and from the Tactical Intelligence Program budgets. The NFIP cuts Kerry proposed were broad-ranging reductions in the overall mission of the Central Intelligence Agency; however, the cuts from Tactical Intelligence would have cut a program that provides intelligence support for American commanders and soldiers on the ground."

[Lokibob]

Here are 2 exerpts from PRO Kerry articles that discuss his service in VN.

---

http://slate.msn.com/id/2087214/#Correct

Reality check: On March 17, 1969, Kerry's superior officer passed along a request from Kerry to be reassigned "as a personal aide in Boston, New York, or Wash., D.C. area." The basis for this request was a rule that allowed any Navy officer with three wounds to seek reassignment "regardless of the nature of the wounds." Kerry had indeed received three wounds, but all were minor (they had caused him to miss only two days of service), and the third was on March 13, 1969, just four days before his transfer request was forwarded. In sum, he got out as soon as he could. The Boston Globe noted that "none of [Kerry's] wounds was disabling" and that he got his transfer "six months before his combat tour was slated to end." According to the Globe, "Kerry declined … 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."

---

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/02/11/2003098345

For example, the fabled and distinguished chief of naval operations (CNO), Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, told me -- 30 years ago when he was still CNO -- that during his own command of US naval forces in Vietnam, just prior to his anointment as CNO, young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass, by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets.
"We had virtually to straight-jacket him to keep him under control," the admiral said. "Bud" Zumwalt got it right when he assessed Kerry as having large ambitions -- but promised that his career in Vietnam would haunt him if he were ever on the national stage.

[Destro]

I thought it would be baby killer Clark but go figure? After all Clark was called a war criminal (or words to that effect) by ultra left Michael Moore and he later backs Clark regardless. Liberals - go figure.

[Destro]

You are doing what this article says will not win a thing. Lay off the 'Nam service shtick. It will get us no advantage. His after 'Nam voting record is what must be exposed.

[Atchafalaya]

One can protest, but how long after the issue is moot is the protest relevant. When the issue has been settled and the protests continue then motives are certainly fair game for query and comment. Kerry is making the race hustlers modus operendi his; anytime an inconvient truth is forthcoming the word racist is employed. Kerry is trying to inoculate himself from scrutiny of his post Vietnam aid and comfort to the enemy and leftist Senatorial voting record by touting his Vietnam service and using it as a shield. We all made mistakes when we were young; maybe Kerry made his by going to Vietnam and it wasn't until he came back that he really found himself (true colors). Think about that!!!

[pfflier]

Kerry's strategy was a pre-emptive attack in overwhelming force to prevent the Republicans from gaining any ground on his post war activity. He used deception, shaded truths, outright lies and misinformation.

BTW These are all things he accused President Bush of doing.

Kerry's advantage is that the press is already running against President Bush, they are looking for a president.

[stockpixx]

Question.. How does a "HERO" get 3 purple hearts in less than 4 months without even being in a hospital??? My husband was there.. He laughed!!!

[Destro]

The purple hearts are legit. You don't need to be heavily wounded to get one. As long as the wound is in a combat zone it is a purple heart. Kerry's wounds while minor were from enemy fire. Like I keep saying, honor Kerry's naval service and slam his senatorial record.

[Destro]

I think it was good stategery by the Kerry camp...They clearly made an issue of the Military record(s)...but, when voters scrutinize Kerry - and discover that he did serve in Viet Nam...It's hard to see that service as "disappointing" or a weakness...so it's a win/win for Kerry... Bush took the bait and spent a week babbling about pay stubs...

God bless you!! Finally someone gets it!!! Can I use your words in future posts?

[Destro]

Hanoi Jane - hmm was that not the hair metal band from the 80s?

That is as deep as the vast middle gets.

[Just mythoughts]

The "DEVIL" has enough advocates.

What is being ignored is this. These lying bunch of donkeys set a new STANDARD, in order to be President even if you are President your word is not good enough you must release your military records.

Now if JFKerry wants to be President he must release his military records.

If JFKerry had nothing to hide they all would be in full view.

[Destro]

Like corkscrew said @ #16 - that will also play into Kerry's hands.