RE: Should Kerry Apologize?

RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

KenDckey -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 10:45:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrappyDom Ken, When are you going to applogize to the troops in Iraq for caring less about their lives than about petty domestic politics? I am sorry, I thought I was speaking on behalf of the troops sence it was Kerry that in essence, though not specifically, called them dumb individuals because they didn't get through the educational system. As for having to appologize, there is no need. I even volunteered to go but the Military wouldn't let me because of my service connected medical conditions

NorthernGent -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 10:47:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: knees2you At issue is Kerry's comment, to a group of California students on Monday, that people unable to succeed in the U.S. educational system would likely "get stuck in Iraq." I think it's a fair point. In essence, the above is relevant to every country in the world i.e. if the education system fails you there is a fair chance you may end up in the army in an attempt to earn a living (and thus be sent to a killing zone i.e. Iraq). I fail to see the problem (apart from the current political climate meaning certain sections of society will take offence). In fact, it is commendable to stand up and say let's give our children an education of a standard which means they can earn a good living as a civilian. Sounds fair enough to me - is he running in the next election? Can I vote for him?

LotusSong -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 11:02:07 AM)
The only thing he should apologize for is botching the telling of his joke.

MasterTonyS -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 11:05:20 AM)
What surprises Me more than anything is how everyone who wasn't there to hear THE ENTIRE CONTEXT of what he said assumes that he was slamming the troops. He wasn't you can read it here: http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Kerry_Sick_of_GOP_attacks_from_1031.html Before he said what all the spin jockey at Fox (Not)News are orgasming over, he made a few jokes about Bush and the joke had to do with the current wannabe administration's inability to do any research on whatever needs attention. Besides, has everyone forgotten how Bush joked about not finding the WMD's in Iraq at the Press Corps Dinner earlier this year? Katrina, the "WMD" lie that got us into the quagmire in Iraq, all of that wouldn't have happened if just one of those sycophants had bothered to check their facts. The truth is bad for them.

KenDckey -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 11:06:28 AM)
OK Point being that the m ilitary is educated. here is a part of the requirements outlined in Army Regulations. The soldier is considered for promotion using the “whole soldier” concept, whereby the soldier’s qualifications for promotion are based on his or her entire record. The promotion board’s analysis of the soldier’s file includes an evaluation of the scope and variety of assignments; an estimate of potential expected of an NCO at the next higher grade; trends of efficiency; the length of service and maturity; awards, decorations, and commendations; education (military and civilian4); moral standards, integrity, and character; and general physical condition. Also the military requires a minimum of a HS education (the American Industry Standard for many jobs) to enter service. I also understand that the Military, since my retirement, has instituted a policy where senior non-commissioned officers now are required to have a college education like Warrant officers and commissioned officers.

mnottertail -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 11:10:57 AM)
Ken, you know you can get waivers for that. Ron

LaTigresse -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 11:13:52 AM)
I was gonna say, I know several NCO's that did not go to college.

KenDckey -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 11:52:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Ken, you know you can get waivers for that. Ron I wish Ron but not with my problems. I love the mideast and wish I could go back

KenDckey -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 11:58:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse I was gonna say, I know several NCO's that did not go to college. Yea depends on several things. Are they senior NCO's (E-7, E8 or E9). When did they achieve the rank (grandfathering) and are they active/reserve/NG. Like I said it was done after I retired so I won't guarantee anything. If they did it like the GI Bill which I didn't qualify for after retirement because I didn't use it all up before it expired, they would have said anywone such and such a rank on such and such a date would be grandfathered and this would not apply. I personally paid for my 56 hrs out of my pocket because I thought I was going to get the GI Bill for post granduate education, then I became a single parent and dropped out completley.

ToGiveDivine -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 12:19:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: Has nothing to do with the mision. Has to do witht he educational status of the members of the military - essentially calling them dumb because they don't have college degrees. In his appology he stated You can put any words into someone's mouth you choose. That doesn't make it true. This is funny because people on these forums are always doing this to Bush, Kerry, etc. It seems everyone knows exactly what these candidates mean the instant they say something and it doesn't matter that anything they say could be taken multiple ways. From what I've seen, no matter what a politician says, the zealots from the opposing party are going to think they meant the worst. Since we all say stupid things or we all say things that we meant one way, but other people took to mean a different way; isn't it possible that the politician you hate from the other party could have said something that you took to mean the opposite of what they meant? For all the talk of tolerance in politics, or from politicians, or from their base voters ... these same people have no tolerance for the positions of the other side. I too am intolerant - of both political parties (it just simplifies things) Not all liberals are bad, not all conservatives are bad, not everything Bush has done is bad, not everything that Kerry has done is bad, not everything the Democrats have done is bad, not everything the Republicans have done is bad. Only extreme zealots (from either side) think differently and to have one side without the other would cut out important thoughts and discussion points. Bipartisanship is the best policy ... how can we get our businesses to make lots of money while making sure the environment is kept clean? how can we get affordable healthcare for everyone without bankrupting the country? how can we keep our country safe without removing everything fundamental we believe in? There has to be compromise on both sides, you can't have everything your way, the hawks and the doves have to work together. As long as people in this country are so tied to "their party" and not to their country; then things will never get better. There are people that want this country to fail because it will make Bush look bad - why? Why would they want their own country to fail to make one person look bad? We've cut and run in the past (e.g. Vietnam, Somalia, Beirut, etc.) and each time it emboldens the people that hate us (the non-Americans) to attack us. Personally, I'd like to pull our troops from just about every country we have them in now, and stop giving money to every country (including the U.N.) just so they'll like us (even though they won't) and spend that money here. If some country attacks us or our interests, we bomb the hell out of their military and infrastructure so they can't do it anymore and make it expensive for them. If a terrorist group attacks us, then we attack the country they were based out of (like Afganistan) in the same manner. Not send in troops; just ruin their country, and not just a factory or two. After a while, only the nuttyiest of the nuts will continue to attack us (or let terrorists operate out of their country) and the nuttyiest of the nuts are so wacked out that no deterrent would work anyway. I don't think anyone would dislike us any worse than they do now, but they'd be less likely to piss us off. At some point when other countries notice we aren't going to meddle (or fix their damn problems for them), then they'll be more likely to take on some of the world's problems themselves.

KenDckey -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:20:09 PM)
You know Devine I gotta agree for the most part. I joined the thread because I felt that, regardless of the intent, Kerry insulted the troops. Had nothing to do with policy, whether or not we should be in Iraq or party affiliation. Just a desire to speak my peace on the troops. Since I am one (I am still considered a soldier because I draw a retainer fee) I believe that I have that right. I feel that soldiers were insulted, I expressed that and was told to shut up. I was told that soldiers are uneducated so I tried to express my personal knowledge that says otherwise. Has nothing to do with Political Affiliation. A soldier is a soldier, he follows orders, carries out public policy (regardless of whether he agrees or not) and does what s/he is told. As a soldier I have mixed thoughts on what you are proposing. I agree that it would be nice to just bomb some of our advesaries back into the stone age. Minimizes losses. But I also liked being stationed overseas for economic and cultural reasons (I always saved money out of the country and spent it in the land of the big PX - LOL). I do believe that your proposal is deserving of it's own thread and highly recommend it.

farglebargle -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:29:05 PM)
"I joined the thread because I felt that, regardless of the intent, Kerry insulted the troops. " Explain SLOWLY how Kerry insulted anyone? You either pay attention and do well with your education, or you're going to have ONE OPTION for economic viability, obedience to a dishonorable coward. Now, HOW INTELLIGENT is anyone who gives up their freedom and liberty to obey a dishonorable coward?

LotusSong -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:29:11 PM)
Democrats need to learn the fine art of Downplay. The Republicans took Foley's situation from being "inappropriate emails" to "I was molested by a priest" to oh..it was just "overly friendly emails"

ToGiveDivine -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:31:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kentucky You know Devine I gotta agree for the most part. I joined the thread because I felt that, regardless of the intent, Kerry insulted the troops. Had nothing to do with policy, whether or not we should be in Iraq or party affiliation. Just a desire to speak my peace on the troops. Since I am one (I am still considered a soldier because I draw a retainer fee) I believe that I have that right. I feel that soldiers were insulted, I expressed that and was told to shut up. I was told that soldiers are uneducated so I tried to express my personal knowledge that says otherwise. Has nothing to do with Political Affiliation. A soldier is a soldier, he follows orders, carries out public policy (regardless of whether he agrees or not) and does what s/he is told. As a soldier I have mixed thoughts on what you are proposing. I agree that it would be nice to just bomb some of our advesaries back into the stone age. Minimizes losses. But I also liked being stationed overseas for economic and cultural reasons (I always saved money out of the country and spent it in the land of the big PX - LOL). I do believe that your proposal is deserving of it's own thread and highly recommend it. Well, bombing them back to the stone-age is a bit much, but taking out their ability to be offensive and to hit their pocketbook isn't a bad idea if they chose to attack us. And I don't want to pull our troops out of every country, having bases in like England, Germany, Japan, etc., is handy when there are problems and we need to get supplies to countries that have had a natural disaster or a transfer place to get our citizens from some other country back to the U.S. in the event of a disaster or evacuation. I don't want to be an isolationist; I just don't want us to be the world's policeman anymore. The EU should be strong enough to take care of Europe without a whole of of assistance from us and SouthEast Asia is getting to that point also.

peterK50 -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:31:02 PM)
When Bush apologizes to the nation for his many lies & disgraces, maybe then.

farglebargle -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:34:57 PM)
quote: A soldier is a soldier, he follows orders, carries out public policy (regardless of whether he agrees or not) and does what s/he is told. When Bush lost his nerve over the dangerous jungles of Texas in April of 1972, he just stopped showing up. That MAY be counting as "Service", but it ain't "With Honor". And it explains why Bush is unable to LEAD...

ToGiveDivine -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:38:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: A soldier is a soldier, he follows orders, carries out public policy (regardless of whether he agrees or not) and does what s/he is told. When Bush lost his nerve over the dangerous jungles of Texas in April of 1972, he just stopped showing up. That MAY be counting as "Service", but it ain't "With Honor". And it explains why Bush is unable to LEAD... So, you are saying that Clinton wasn't eligible to lead either? He wasn't even in the National Guard. Your hating of Bush is interfering with common sense.

KenDckey -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:48:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle "I joined the thread because I felt that, regardless of the intent, Kerry insulted the troops. " Explain SLOWLY how Kerry insulted anyone? You either pay attention and do well with your education, or you're going to have ONE OPTION for economic viability, obedience to a dishonorable coward. Now, HOW INTELLIGENT is anyone who gives up their freedom and liberty to obey a dishonorable coward? By calling them failures so to speak because they all didn't get college educations.

farglebargle -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:52:41 PM)
quote: So, you are saying that Clinton wasn't eligible to lead either? He wasn't even in the National Guard. Your hating of Bush is interfering with common sense. Clinton didn't kill 3,000 US Troops and between 300,000 and 900,000 Iraqis with his inability to lead. I'm a TRADITIONAL CONSERVATIVE. I hate Bush for his Fiscal Irresponsibility. His INCOMPETENCE is just gravy...

KenDckey -> RE: Should Kerry Apologize? (11/1/2006 1:53:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ToGiveDivine Well, bombing them back to the stone-age is a bit much, but taking out their ability to be offensive and to hit their pocketbook isn't a bad idea if they chose to attack us. And I don't want to pull our troops out of every country, having bases in like England, Germany, Japan, etc., is handy when there are problems and we need to get supplies to countries that have had a natural disaster or a transfer place to get our citizens from some other country back to the U.S. in the event of a disaster or evacuation. I don't want to be an isolationist; I just don't want us to be the world's policeman anymore. The EU should be strong enough to take care of Europe without a whole of of assistance from us and SouthEast Asia is getting to that point also. I can remember one of my friends and a guy that worked for me that was killed in a bombing in Berlin Germany. I believe that everyplace is a potential hot spot. I do think that it would be appropriate to have Pre-Positioned War Supplies all over the world if we were to pull our troops back. That would increase our speed of delivery of a war package to a hot spot as needed.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125