Now Khan says about Trump, "Shame on him, Shame on his family" (his family?)

[TooTall]

Repeating Thurlow's lie doesn't make it magically true.
Kerry didn't write the citation and there's no evidence Kerry had anything to do with it. Many others there also said they were under fire, including Rassman, who said he dove under water and held his breath as long as possible to avoid enemy fire. A lifelong Republican, he still thanks Kerry for risking his own life to save him.

Regardless of all the bullshit and mudslinging, the fact remains that Kerry didn't give himself any medals. His CO is unlikely to have given anyone a medal just on their say so. He'd need to put together a package justifying the award. Usually something like, "XO, put together a package for Petty Officer Schmuckatelli."

This article points out a few salient facts about medal awards, the disparity between both the services and ranks.

The military's unfair awards system.

I spent 4 years in a peace time army. I used to respect the awards, I no longer do. After a field problem the commanders would get together and distribute the awards among the companies. Not because any single individual deserved the medals but because it was that company's turn to distribute the medals to someone in their ranks. Then they would decide which troops got the medals authorized to hand out by that individual company.

In Korea they did much the same thing. They had quota of medals to give out and that was more important to those in charge than the merits of the individual receiving them.

Then why do rightards give a shit that Kerry threw away [worthless] medals?

Three of those got Kerry home after only 4 months of his 12 month tour.

So?

You called them worthless.

 

[Faun]

Regardless of all the bullshit and mudslinging, the fact remains that Kerry didn't give himself any medals. His CO is unlikely to have given anyone a medal just on their say so. He'd need to put together a package justifying the award. Usually something like, "XO, put together a package for Petty Officer Schmuckatelli."

This article points out a few salient facts about medal awards, the disparity between both the services and ranks.

The military's unfair awards system.

I spent 4 years in a peace time army. I used to respect the awards, I no longer do. After a field problem the commanders would get together and distribute the awards among the companies. Not because any single individual deserved the medals but because it was that company's turn to distribute the medals to someone in their ranks. Then they would decide which troops got the medals authorized to hand out by that individual company.

In Korea they did much the same thing. They had quota of medals to give out and that was more important to those in charge than the merits of the individual receiving them.

Then why do rightards give a shit that Kerry threw away [worthless] medals?

Three of those got Kerry home after only 4 months of his 12 month tour.

So?

You called them worthless.

slyhunter said...

"I used to respect the awards, I no longer do. After a field problem the commanders would get together and distribute the awards among the companies. Not because any single individual deserved the medals but because it was that company's turn to distribute the medals to someone in their ranks."​

... to me, that sounds like he's saying they're worthless, which is why I then asked, if they're [worthless], why do rightards care if he threw any away?

 

[Divine Wind]

Sly hit, you. Army officers are not quite the level of Marine, but equal or better than Navy in my opinion. Field grade I think they are all generally the same in all the service.

Agreed, but I think it has more to do with living closely under extremely hazardous conditions which weeds out unfit commanders. Thus, by the nature of their missions, Marines and Army would generally have better officers, but that depends on their MOS too. Some of the shittiest officers I've known were paper-pushing, pencil-necked geeks. Great if you need your taxes done, but not worth a shit out on the line.

The Navy and Air Force, by the nature of their missions, have less positions like this, but they still have them. Is there any doubt SEAL officer and NCOs are among the best? Air Force Spec Ops squadrons?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Those criticizing Kerry are worthless human beings.

 

[Divine Wind]

So which is it? The medals are worthy or worthless?

You called them worthless. I disagreed. Scroll up.

 

[Divine Wind]

Those criticizing Kerry are worthless human beings.

Disagreed. What Kerry did post-Vietnam was wrong and conduct unbecoming of a Naval Officer.

 

[TooTall]

Those criticizing Kerry are worthless human beings.

Disagreed. What Kerry did post-Vietnam was wrong and conduct unbecoming of a Naval Officer.

Correct, and he was in the Naval Reserves until 1978, but he did not make this speech POST Vietnam. His traitorous speech to Congress was on 4/23/1971 and US military operations were not ended until 8/15/73. His speech and anti-Vietnam activities were merely a warm up for a run for Congress in anti-Vietnam Massachusetts. He lost.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Those criticizing Kerry are worthless human beings.

Disagreed. What Kerry did post-Vietnam was wrong and conduct unbecoming of a Naval Officer.

Correct, and he was in the Naval Reserves until 1978, but he did not make this speech POST Vietnam. His traitorous speech to Congress was on 4/23/1971 and US military operations were not ended until 8/15/73. His speech and anti-Vietnam activities were merely a warm up for a run for Congress in anti-Vietnam Massachusetts. He lost.

His speech was neither traitorous nor anti-veterans. It was a heartfelt plea to stop young Americans from being killed in a war over the sea in which they had no gain.

 

[Slyhunter]

Those criticizing Kerry are worthless human beings.

Disagreed. What Kerry did post-Vietnam was wrong and conduct unbecoming of a Naval Officer.

Correct, and he was in the Naval Reserves until 1978, but he did not make this speech POST Vietnam. His traitorous speech to Congress was on 4/23/1971 and US military operations were not ended until 8/15/73. His speech and anti-Vietnam activities were merely a warm up for a run for Congress in anti-Vietnam Massachusetts. He lost.

His speech was neither traitorous nor anti-veterans. It was a heartfelt plea to stop young Americans from being killed in a war over the sea in which they had no gain.

Would've been gained if they had allowed the Generals to run the war instead of the Politicians. They didn't fight the war to win, they fought it to try to change the mind of the enemy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Those criticizing Kerry are worthless human beings.

Disagreed. What Kerry did post-Vietnam was wrong and conduct unbecoming of a Naval Officer.

Correct, and he was in the Naval Reserves until 1978, but he did not make this speech POST Vietnam. His traitorous speech to Congress was on 4/23/1971 and US military operations were not ended until 8/15/73. His speech and anti-Vietnam activities were merely a warm up for a run for Congress in anti-Vietnam Massachusetts. He lost.

His speech was neither traitorous nor anti-veterans. It was a heartfelt plea to stop young Americans from being killed in a war over the sea in which they had no gain.

Would've been gained if they had allowed the Generals to run the war instead of the Politicians. They didn't fight the war to win, they fought it to try to change the mind of the enemy.

A military victory would have required invading North Vietnam.

Hindsight indicates the US would have probably gotten away with it, but we did not know how weak the Red Chinese were from Mao's cultural revolution.

And though we would have won the war, we would have lost the peace, as we did in Iraq.

 

[Divine Wind]

Correct, and he was in the Naval Reserves until 1978, but he did not make this speech POST Vietnam. His traitorous speech to Congress was on 4/23/1971 and US military operations were not ended until 8/15/73. His speech and anti-Vietnam activities were merely a warm up for a run for Congress in anti-Vietnam Massachusetts. He lost.

By "post-Vietnam" I was speaking of his service in the Navy during his tours in Vietnam. The dates the Swiftboat assholes were lying about.

 

[Divine Wind]

A military victory would have required invading North Vietnam.

Hindsight indicates the US would have probably gotten away with it, but we did not know how weak the Red Chinese were from Mao's cultural revolution.

And though we would have won the war, we would have lost the peace, as we did in Iraq.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda. As a vet, you know hindsight is 20/20, but it's a lot harder to see in the middle of a fight. Vietnam was just one of the Proxy Wars fought against communism...and the Communists were fighting against capitalist democracy.

 

[Divine Wind]

Would've been gained if they had allowed the Generals to run the war instead of the Politicians. They didn't fight the war to win, they fought it to try to change the mind of the enemy.

Agreed and disagreed. Definitely agreed that when our civilian leadership decides to go to war, they should lay out the objectives then let the Generals and Admirals run the war to complete those objectives.

Disagreed about the "Hearts and Minds" idea. Sure, that part came later and it is, indeed, part of COIN, but the North Vietnam and their Soviet and PRC supporters aren't insurgents nor guerrillas. They are/were hostile communist nations. The dilemma of the Proxy Wars is to win the current proxy war without starting WWIII. This is why it was decided not to invade North Vietnam.

The problem was that we were supporting such a corrupt group of people against a brutal communist nation that we were fucked whether we fought the war or gave up and went home. They didn't know that at the time, but it cost the lives of about 60,000 Americans and countless maimed, shattered and wounded Americans to figure it out.