Skip to comments.Open letter to John Kerry---Greater Men have Tried
Posted on 03/28/2014 8:55:00 AM PDT by Ooh-Ah
Dear Secretary of State John Kerry:
Because of my respect for the United States, I will attempt to afford you the honor you think you so richly deserve. Its hard to speak to you with anything but anger, hard to feel the need, again, to start from the beginning because you clearly choose to ignore history in your quest for glory. It is a quest destined to fail but its outcome, even, or more accurately especially, in failure, will hurt Israel.
Greater men than you have tried to make, to force, peace on the Middle East. I promise you, you will fail too. You will fail because you are not addressing the root cause of the problem. You, like so many before you, take the easy way out. Blame Israel. It is so easy to do, and so stupid.
I could speak to you of history a history longer and greater than you can imagine. I could speak to you of injustices yes, our land is filled with the graves of those murdered for the unjust reason that they lived here, or traveled abroad, or ate in the wrong restaurant, or took the wrong bus.
I could speak to you of justice of a population exchange similar to those that have taken place throughout history as nations settle between war and peace. They left their lands to go there, most voluntarily so that their invading brothers would have a clear path as they pushed the Jews into the sea. And our people, who left their homes and possessions in Arab lands, most forced, not voluntarily, and came here.
We fed our brothers, clothed them, gave them homes. And most importantly, we loved them and gave them the most precious of gifts a future, a present, as integral parts of the land and people of this country. My neighbor, the family across the street they live in the same houses that I do, drive the same cars, attend the same schools. He is an engineer; he is a judge in the courts. She is a nurse; she is a lawyer. All my neighbors, though their grandparents came here with nothing.
And at the same time, across many borders, the Arabs put their brothers in refugee camps, all but starved them. They raised them to be embittered not at those who kept them in squalor, but those they had hoped to defeat. They blame us and you are naive enough to blame us as well?
They chose war, John Kerry, while we chose compromise. And you would blame us for this horrible chain of the decades? They invaded five Arab nations, in 1949. They attacked. Out of sheer desperation, we won enough of our land to give us a measure of security it lasted only 7 years, until they attacked again. But oh what we did in those 7 years. We welcomed our refugees from Europe, from Arab lands. We built them tent cities and turned them into real cities. We conquered swamp land and made it habitable and we raised our children to dream that someday there would be peace. We created universities and schools and parks.
But the Arabs would have none of it. In 1948, in 1956, again in 1967 and again in 1973 and again and again, almost daily, we fight off their attempts to do in 2014 what they failed to do in 1948. They have not learned and amazingly enough, John Kerry, neither have you.
We have built and evacuated whole communities; we have withdrawn from land in exchange for nothing but the hope that we could appease the unappeasable. We have flown around the world to help others from earthquakes, tsunamis, devastating storms, famine and more.
We have allowed the Arabs yes, allowed them, to fire tens of thousands of missiles at our cities and we know they have more than 170,000 more rockets and missiles ready to try again. At any time and with no notice whatsoever, we have the power to flatten Gaza into the worlds largest, flattest parking lot. And each time they attack, we think of it and know we cant do it, wont do it. And you would blame us for the failure to make peace?
When we attempt to stop them, to push back their military capabilities, just a bit, we aim for the rocket launchers, the arsenals, the training camps while they aim for our cities Beersheva, Shderot, Ashkelon, Netivot, Ashdod. And you would threaten us for the ongoing state of war?
There cannot be peace until you recognize your enemy. There cannot be successful negotiations if you fail to understand those you would bring to the table. You fail on both counts.
After hearing that you threatened Israel unless the peace talks succeed, I can only conclude that your ignorance is even greater than I thought. I knew, years ago, that you had no clue what the Arab world is thinking, feeling, dreaming of. Now I know the same is true about Israel you dont understand us any better than you understand the Arabs and that amazes me.
Unlike the Arab world, Israel is an open society read our newspapers, speak to the people on the street. No one will stop you and we wont escort you with secret police to control your experience. Pick any town, city, village, settlement and you will hear the same thing. Pick any street, any person and ask them what they dream of, what they want for their children. We do not dream of glorious death and martyrdom for our sons. We dream that they will never have to even serve in the army.
I have friends who agonized over their sons going into the army. I could understand my agony, as I grew up in the United States where all my friends promised they would run away from the US before they would ever be drafted. I knew nothing of army and war and guns. But my friends here in Israel? They had served in the army; why did they suffer so when their sons were drafted.
We served so that they wouldnt have to, Ive been told over and over again. They never believed, 20+ years later that their sons and daughters would have to sacrifice three years of their lives, that wed still be at war.
You wont hear that in the Arab world. Oh, theyll tell you that they dream of peace because they know that is what you want to hear, but in Arabic, they will talk of a time when there will be no Jews in the entire Middle East, never mind no Jews in the Palestine they envision. Their religious leaders will whip them up to the glory of Allah and jihad. But still you would expect us to make peace with them?
Theirs is a culture built on a dream a dream that they will own the world my corner, John Kerry, and even yours. Theirs is a society that believes in a heaven earned by causing the deaths of others and so when their sons blow themselves up and kill those Jews, they celebrate. And yes, they celebrated on 9/11 when they killed your people just as they celebrated when we released their terrorists and killers in yet another attempt to appease them and you.
If you dont understand their ability to celebrate, I will confess that neither do I. I have seen the mothers hugging their sons in a video, made the night before they killed themselves and the innocent men, women, and children, of their enemies who happened to be on that bus, in that mall, or asleep in their homes. It doesnt matter to them if they kill a soldier, a man with a gun, a pregnant woman, or a helpless child. The more, the better, in their twisted interpretation of what their God wants. You dont understand this and I can see where it is hard, given your western mentality. But not understanding it doesnt give you the right to ignore it.
You wont fail in your goal of ramming peace down our throats because of this, however. You will fail because, amazingly enough, you dont even understand Israel. We are the easiest to get, the easiest, honestly. All you have to do is listen and see but even that is beyond you.
Listen to our national anthem it does not speak of war. It is called, The Hope and speaks of a dream of 2,000 years to be a free people. We value that the ability to protect ourselves, to be free in the land of our forefathers. Even the most right wing among us would be willing to compromise for a real peace, a peace where our children and grandchildren could live without the fears we deal with daily. We do not interfere in how they raise their children; we are stupid enough to even fund some of their text books all in our own misguided belief that we can make peace with those who do not yet want it.
You threaten us with economic sanctions, with international isolation. This is your latest blunder, and it is a big one. Israel is laughing at you this morning. Economic sanctions?
They gassed us, beat us, bombed us, burned us. They haunted us, hunted us, hated us through the centuries across many lands and through this land in the last several decades. They burned the synagogue where my grandmother was hiding; they gassed my great grandmother to death.
International isolation? They put us in ghettos, they exploded our buses and shot our babies in the head. They lynched my neighbor, attacked the buses on which my friends travel. They shot my daughters teacher (and his infant son) and ambushed and killed a colleague of mine.
We are fighting for our lives, John Kerry no less today than we were in 1948. The ONLY difference is that through the greed and stupidity of the Arab nations, we are stronger than we ever were, not weaker. You will fail, John Kerry, because you are fool enough to think you can come here, wave your American flag, look at your watch and tell us youd like to finish these peace negotiations by 5:00 p.m. because you have a date at the opera or a baseball game to go to.
For a long time now, the Arabs have fooled you. Theyll speak to you of peace over the coffee they serve you and then when you leave the room, they slap each other on the backs and laugh another successful day at making the US look stupid.
Now, this time, we will have that in common with the Arabs; we are laughing at you too. Naftali Bennet has tried to explain it to you, There has not yet been a nation that has given up its land due to economic threats, and nor will we. Only security will bring economic stability, not a terrorist state near Ben-Gurion Airport.
Greater men have failed, John Kerry and I promise you, until you know Israel and until you understand the Arabs, you dont have a prayer of succeeding. Go watch the Superbowl, at least then, maybe youll have done something worthwhile.
Beautifully and eloquently written. Unfortunately, John Kerry can’t read anything that isn’t written in crayon.
If Paula thinks kerry is totally ignorant of Israel and her people, just wait till the first time it or it’s successor come to Maine after we secede.
Brilliant, May I use it?
Greater Men have Tried..
Like that would take much.
By all means :)
By all means :)
Makes me want to stand up and cheer for the author and curse that we continue to have cretins like John Kerry be our “representative of foreign policy”.
Sometimes I can barely contain my contempt for my own country and the path it is choosing.
We now have Lesser-man for a new Kerry nick.
Nice piece. Into Kerry’s file 13.
My cat is a greater man than John Kerry.
(Just a guess — based on how things have worked in the past.)
Lumping Kerry in a sentence with the phrase “greater men than you,” carries the implication that he is 1) a man, and 2) possibly semi-great. Neither is really true. It doesn’t take a greater man to out perform Kerry; a doorknob or even a rancid onion can do it.
Thank you sir.
That is a brilliant analysis.
If youd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
One of the best personal descriptions of the processing of Israel, aka the peace process, I've read
The blood on Kerrys hands
By Jim Bancroft, Sep 1, 2004
Every action has a reaction. We sometimes refer to Newtons Third Law in ways that do not refer to physical science, but to social and emotional constructs, events we see or hear of, events we perceive of happening or events that we experience ourselves.
In my life time, I have seen my country and our politics change in many ways. As a child, I watched the Vietnam War on television; I saw the body counts, I saw the nation fixated on the war shown on the TV screen, I cheered on the troops, and I felt sorrow when I saw the caskets and heard of our losses.
I also saw the anti-war protests on TV. I had to have my Dad explain some words and terms used by the Police in Detroit in 1968 after the riots in how they described the actions of the anti-war people who claimed to be for peace, but seemed to only come to fight and disrupt.
Their actions had consequences. The American people started to see our media play over and again the masses of people who looked normal sometimes, and some that were the Hippie looking type people. We saw abnormal behavior portrayed on television and in the news as being common.
We saw our nation change.
One of the people who most affected us, was John Kerry. John Kerrys association with these anti-war groups changed our nation forever. I am 45, and even in my age, I see it. But, I wonder how many others do.
John Kerrys actions, and the actions of those who openly protested against our country during the Vietnam War, made it socially acceptable to hate the US while living here, and to falsely claim what they are doing is Patriotism. The actions of the Vietnam protester was to make the call for Socialist or Communist type changes in our government system an accepted thing.
But that is not all. By their actions, a war was ended earlier than expected. Not in a way that was in our favor, but in a way that embarrassed our country even though we were winning the war militarily.
The actions of the anti-war groups affected national policy. We had anti-war groups start up earlier than 1968 when John Kerry entered Vietnam, true, but their acceptance and liveliness was not noticeable. It wasnt until after John Kerry got home and started a group called Vietnam Veterans Against the War, VVAW, with his friend Jane Fonda that the openly socially acceptable participation in American anti-war activity took place in common American thought.
This was a significant group, in that, for the first time in our nations history that I can find, a group of veterans who had fought in a war, founded a group that was against national policy in calling for the war to end; not with a victory by our armed forces, but with a defeat of our armed forces. This group was calling for our own nation, THEIR own nation, to remove all troops from Vietnam, admit that our actions there were morally wrong.
They were calling for their nation to lose against the enemy, to give up the fight against the Communist system which genuinely threatened the nation of Vietnam since the late 1940s and early 1950s. And because of Vietnams geographic location, the seaways of South-East Asia would be threatened with a puppet government run by either China or the Soviet Union in direct opposition to the United States as a nation in order to spread their communist philosophy through the end of a gun.
And they did all this with the backing of our national media, and with all the backing of the political party that was against the President who was in power. . . who had absolutely nothing to do with starting the war in the first place.
These peace groups, led by John Kerry and Jane Fonda and Bill Clinton and their sort, caused our government to step back away from a national commitment to our allies in the South-East Asia peninsula, abandon our war against Communism in Vietnam, and in general, stop our pro-active response to the Communist threat that was a definite reality in the world then.
I titled this paper, THE BLOOD ON KERRYS HANDS for a reason, and that reason all goes back to Vietnam and the effect that his participation in leading a group like VVAW had on the United States and the world.
The connection between VVAW and the peace groups and the early end of the Vietnam War without a US victory against the Communist forces fighting in South Vietnam has not been explored in depth by anyone that I am aware of. There are some things that are important to remember from this time period that can only be examined in hindsight; namely, What happened to the US and its policy in foreign affairs immediately following the Vietnam War, and why?
At the time John Kerry left Vietnam, it was early 1969. According to records kept by the US government, by the end of 1968, the US losses in personnel were 36,152 persons killed in action from service in Vietnam from all causes.
This is important for one significant reason: 1968 was the TET offensive, the last gasp of the North Vietnamese, a large offensive where the American people were told by a media that the war was un-winnable. But was this the case?
General Vo Nguyen Giap, the leader of the North Vietnamese Army during the war, had these comments to make concerning the efforts of anti-war protesters like John Kerry, Jane Fonda, and VVAW, which Jane Fonda was the co-founder with John Kerry; this article is reprinted from NEWSMAX:
Gen. Giap Thanks Kerry & Co. for Anti-war Protests
Celebrating the 29th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, the North Vietnamese general who led his forces to victory said Friday he was grateful to leaders of the U.S. anti-war movement, one of whom was presidential candidate John Kerry.
“I would like to thank them,” said Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, now 93, without mentioning Kerry by name. “Any forces that wish to impose their will on other nations will surely fail,” he added.
Reuters, which first reported Giap’s comments, suggested that the former enemy general was mindful of Kerry’s role in leading some of the highest-profile anti-war protests of the entire Vietnam War. Before the British wire service quoted Gen. Giap, it noted:
“The Vietnam War, known in Vietnam as the American War, has become a hot issue in the U.S. presidential race with Democrat John Kerry drawing attention to his service and President Bush’s Republicans disparaging Kerry’s later anti-war stand.”
North Vietnamese Col. Bui Tin, who served under Gen. Giap on the general staff of the North Vietnamese army, received South Vietnam’s unconditional surrender on April 30, 1975.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal after his retirement, Col. Tin explicitly credited leaders of the U.S. anti-war movement, saying they were “essential to our strategy.”
“Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9AM to follow the growth of the antiwar movement,” Col. Tin told the Journal. Visits to Hanoi by Kerry anti-war allies Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and others, he said, “gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses.”
“We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war,” the North Vietnamese military man explained.
Kerry did much the same thing in widely covered speeches such as the one he delivered to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April 1971. “Through dissent and protest [America] lost the ability to mobilize a will to win,” Col. Tin concluded.
These are not insignificant statements. These North Vietnamese military men are crediting the American Anti-War movement with being the reason they held out in time of war. The obvious conflict in this statement of theirs is, if there was NO ANTI-WAR movement in the US, these North Vietnamese military men would have NOT been optimistic about the outcome of the war. They would have been approaching the US in an attitude of military weakness, not military strength.
This is undeniable. In fact, there are some more direct quotes from General Giap on this very subject.
Gen. Giap: Kerry’s Group Helped Hanoi Defeat U.S.
The North Vietnamese general in charge of the military campaign that finally drove the U.S. out of South Vietnam in 1975 credited a group led by Democratic presidential front-runner John Kerry with helping him achieve victory.
In his 1985 memoir about the war, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap wrote that if it weren’t for organizations like Kerry’s Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the U.S. - according to Fox News Channel war historian Oliver North.
That’s why, he predicted on Tuesday, the Vietnam War issue “is going to blow up in Kerry’s face.”
“People are going to remember Gen. Giap saying if it weren’t for these guys [Kerry’s group], we would have lost,” North told radio host Sean Hannity.
“The Vietnam Veterans Against the War encouraged people to desert, encouraged people to mutiny - some used what they wrote to justify fragging officers,” noted the former Marine lieutenant colonel, who earned two purple hearts in Vietnam.
“John Kerry has blood of American soldiers on his hands,” North said.
The TET offensive of 1968 has been claimed to be a disaster for American forces, but is this the case?
Here is a short synopsis of just what happened during the TET Offensive of 1968:
Myth: The Tet Offensive Was a Communist Victory The 1968 Tet offensive was a total and complete miltary disaster for the North Vietnamese Communists no matter how you look at it. If you measure victory by territory gained or enemy killed, the North Vietnamese Army and the Viet Cong failed dismally in their attacks.
The NVA and VC had counted on a “People’s Uprising” to carry them to victory, however there was no such uprising. They did exactly what the American military wanted them to do. They massed in large formations that were incredibly vulnerable to the awesome fire support the U.S. Military was able to bring to bear on them in a coordinated and devastating manner.
The NVA and VC attacked only ARVN installations with the exception of the US Embassy in Saigon. Despite reports to the contrary by all major television news networks and the print media, the VC sapper team of 15 men never entered the chancery building and all 15 VC were dead within 6 hours of the attack. They caused no damage to any property and managed to kill 4 US Army MPs, and one Marine guard. The South Vietnamese Police tasked with guarding the Embassy fled at the first sound of gunfire.
The NVA/VC launched major attacks on Saigon, Hue, Quang Tri City, Da Nang, Nha Trang, Qui Nhon, Kontum City, Ban Me Thout, My Tho, Can Tho, and Ben Tre. With the exception of the old imperial city of Hue, the NVA/VC were forced to retreat within 24 hours of the beginning of the offensive. In the process they suffered devastating losses among the southern VC cadres. Using the southern VC as the spearhead of these attacks was an intentional device on the part of the North Vietnamese politcal leadership. They did not want to share power with the southerners after the war, so they sent them out to what was inevitable slaughter. The NVA mainforce battalions were held in “reserve” according to Vo Nguyen Giap, in order to “exploit any breakthroughs”.
In the first week of the attack the NVA/VC lost 32,204 confirmed killed, and 5,803 captured. US losses were 1,015 KIA, while ARVN losses were 2,819 killed. ARVN losses were higher because the NVA/VC, reluctant to enter into a set-piece battle with US forces, attacked targets defended almost exclusively by South Vietnamese troops.
Casualties among the people whom the NVA/VC claimed to be “liberating” were in excess of 7,000, with an additional 5,000 tortured and murdered by the NVA/VC in Hue and elsewhere. In Hue alone, allied forces discovered over 2,800 burial sites containing the mutilated bodies of local Vietnamese teachers, doctors, and political leaders.
And that is the point of this letter. The actions of John Kerry and the anti-war protesters caused American men and women to be killed in war time in Vietnam, the very war where they insisted we withdraw and claim we were at fault and it was all our fault; where Americans were all war criminals and baby-killers. And it was a war we were winning.
According to American records, a total of 58,193 American personnel died in Vietnam from all causes, with 36,152 having died by the end of 1968 when John Kerry entered Vietnam. Kerry entered the Swift Boat Service in December of 1968 and served only 4 months before being sent home after his third Purple Heart.
In 1969, 11,616 American personnel died, and that is the year Kerry started protesting against the Vietnam war after his service. He had already made public statements against the war at the speech he gave at his Yale graduation:
“What was an excess of isolationism has become an excess of interventionism. And this Vietnam War has found our policy makers forcing Americans into a strange corner . . . that if victory escapes us, it would not be the fault of those who lead, but of the doubters who stabbed them in the back — notions all too typical of an America that had to find Americans to blame for the takeover in China by the communists, and then for the takeover in Cuba.
“The United States must, I think, bring itself to understand that the policy of intervention that was right for Western Europe does not and cannot find the same application to the rest of the world. “We have not really lost the desire to serve. We question the very roots of what we are serving.’’
Kerrys actions after the war began as early as 1969 while an Admirals aide:
In October 1969, while Kerry was still on active duty assigned to Admiral Schlech, Kerry was flying Adam Walinsky (Robert F. Kennedy’s former speech writer), around New York state to deliver anti-war speeches. BY Jan. 3, 1970, Kerry had become so inspired by Walinsky’s anti-war beliefs that he petitioned Admiral Schlech, “to tell his boss that his conscientious dictated that he protest the war, that he wanted out of the Navy immediately so that he could run for congress.”
Admiral Schlech consented and Kerry received an honorable discharge from the Navy six months early.
Kerry was full force into the VVAW by early 1970. The anti-war movement was well known by then and many protests were held including the ill fated Kent State incident.
John Kerry did not just protest in the US because of his beliefs, he also traveled to meet the Communist leaders of North Vietnam in Paris.
John Kerry, in sworn testimony before the Senate in April 1971, said he met with the North Vietnamese and Vietcong delegations in Paris in May 1970. He said they discussed their peace proposals — especially the eight points of Madam Binh. Kerry strongly recommended that the Senate accept those proposals.
I have been to Paris. I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government and of all eight of Madam Binh’s points...
I realize that even my visits in Paris, precedents had been set by Senator McCarthy and others, in a sense are on the borderline of private individuals negotiating, et cetera.
In the ensuing months, Kerry became even more strident in his insistence that the US accept Madam Binh’s (and the NVM and VC’s) peace proposals.
Meanwhile, other representatives of Kerry’s group, the Vietnam Veterans Against The War (VVAW ), met with the NVM and VC delegations in Paris, in March 1971. They were even photographed sitting at a table with them, as in a photo displayed in Winter Soldiers, by Richard Stacewicz, page 284.
Subsequently, VVAW representatives met with the North Vietnamese and Vietcong delegations on numerous occasions, both in Paris and even in Hanoi.
The VVAW even signed a treaty with the North Vietnamese which included all of Madam Binh’s points, as noted by the historian of the anti-war movement, Gerald Nicosia, his book Home To War:
The FBI has recently released the files on VVAW and can be found here, documenting the knowledge of Kerrys visit to Paris to speak with the North Vietnamese:
These actions in meeting with foreign leaders who are directly engaged in treaty negotiations with the United States Government border on treason.
Did Navy Lt. Kerry violate The UCMJ?
August 23rd, 2004
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is a federal law, enacted by Congress. Its provisions are contained in United States Code, Title 10, Chapter 47. Article 36 of the UCMJ allows the President to prescribe rules and procedures to implement the provisions of the UCMJ. The President does this via the Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM) which is an executive order that contains detailed instructions for implementing military law for the United States Armed Forces.
The UCMJ states:
ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
Any person who—
(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or (2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;
shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.
John Kerrys meeting with the North Vietnamese, the very people who are killing Americans in the war, borders precariously close to treason, enough to be investigated.
What must be reinforced here, however, is the effect of these actions concerning the point of this paper: How many men died at this point, and what did the North Vietnamese say about why they prolonged the war?
It was the American Anti-War movement.
John Kerry was a part of that movement, a major leader of that movement.
The North Vietnamese publicly stated that the American anti-war movement encouraged them to continue to fight.
The next connection is impossible to avoid: John Kerrys actions directly lead to American servicemen and women to be killed in combat because of the encouragement his actions gave to the enemy, the North Vietnamese.
From 1970 until the end of American involvement in 1975, 9,586 Americans were killed in Vietnam. Killed because American anti-war protests encouraged the North Vietnamese to continue fighting the war.
It is not a stretch to see that the actions of John Kerry and Jane Fonda directly lead to the deaths of thousands of Americans in the Vietnam War.
Is this the only list of failures or deaths caused by the American Anti-war movement? Sadly, no.
American foreign policy was changed dramatically after the Vietnam War. American military dominance was questioned, new weapons programs were held back, American intelligence operations were ended and our CIA was attacked and almost shut down, efforts to remain technologically superior were thwarted at times, and material replacement of military hardware was slowed or refused after 1975.
American prestige was shattered globally. The newspapers of the world all spoke of the American loss in Vietnam, the movie industry put out movies showing Vietnam veterans as psychotic drug abusers or wife beaters and social misfits.
But most importantly, it shattered American resolve to fight when necessary. It caused American public opinion to sway and support a political party over another, even though the party portrayed in a negative light had nothing to do with causing the war and never received the respect it deserved with ending it without a total disaster for the American public had we followed the advice of the anti-war protesters.
This lack of resolve showed in 1975 when the North Vietnamese invaded the South and began a slaughter, killing as many as 1 Million people, causing over 1.5 Million to 2 Million people to flee in small boats to save their very lives.
This lack of resolve showed later that year when the Khymer Rouge began their systematic genocide in Cambodia, leaving the US powerless to intervene to stop the killing, and over 1 Million people were slaughtered.
This lack of resolve showed even in 1979 when the American Embassy was overrun in Tehran, Iran, and then President Jimmy Carter failed to respond with forceful effort with our military in response to the new world threat: Islamic Terrorism.
This lack of resolve showed when then President Ronald Reagan failed to fully make a military effort in Lebanon because of a lack of backing in the House and Senate.
This lack of resolve showed when the Contras were supported for a year or two, only to have the Democrat Senate and House remove the means to provide for their actions against a Communist dictatorship in Nicaragua.
By then, it was almost too late. American resolve was a joke. It took the efforts of Ronald Reagan to rebuild our military out of the shambles that Jimmy Carter left it. It took the efforts of George H. W. Bush in defending the nation of Kuwait in the first Gulf War.
But, once again, an anti-war person came to the forefront, Bill Clinton, who during the 1990s, ignored the obvious threat of radical Islam that the world was facing.
And again, in 2001, with a lot of words, people like John Kerry started blaming someone else instead of the bad guys for 9/11. John Kerry voted for war against the Taliban, and then again voted for war against Saddam Hussein.
But what happened next? The Anti-War movement came out of hiding, and in a war where the enemy directly provided aide and support for terrorists who exploded bombs on American soil, anti-war activists have once again divided the American people, and John Kerry is one of their leaders . . .again.
It is not that much of a stretch to see what happened from John Kerrys actions in the 1960s to today, and how people like him affected our national government policy through their activism and actions.
By leading and organizing protests against the war, John Kerry encouraged the North Vietnamese to continue the war, and thousands of Americans died...
Over a Million South Vietnamese died...
Over a Million Cambodians died . . .
American prestige was tarnished. . .
Islamic terrorism was born and not stopped because of American reluctance to engage in combat after Vietnam, reluctance which was called the Vietnam Syndrome . . .
Communism attempted to overthrow more countries in our own hemisphere . . .
An anti-war leader, Bill Clinton, carrying on the same traditions as John Kerry, failed to stop the obvious growing threat of Islamic Fundamentalist sponsored terrorism . . .
And now, we are engaged in a world wide terror war. The United States appears to be alone in it, too. All because of the pacifism of the American Anti-War movement of the 1960s.
Thats when it started in our generation.
John Kerry has blood on his hands.
Jim Bancroft is a former Marine who served in the United States Marine Corps from 1977 to 1981, and served off the coast of Iran for the Hostage Rescue Attempt of April 24-25, 1980.
“Blame Israel. It is so easy to do, and so stupid.”
Kerry: So what’s the down side? It’s easy to do, and stupid people will approve of it, and maybe make me President in 2016. And if it hurts Israel, it will change their image in the MSM, especially if there are a lot of dead Jews lying around. What more could anyone want?