Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I feel it necessary to put paid to one RW charge about Kerry repeated here

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-08-04 11:32 PM
Original message
I feel it necessary to put paid to one RW charge about Kerry repeated here
People on this board and in the major media accuse Kerry of lumping in National Guard members with draft dodgers. Well guess what, he did! But he lumped them in with the people who wanted to avoid GOING to Vietnam.

Well guess what--if I don't have my facts wrong--guardsmen were not sent to Vietnam. If they were, the wait lists wouldn't have been quite so long. So while joining the national guard isn't equivalent to dodging the draft, it certainly was a way to avoid going to Vietnam. In that sense, dodging the draft and joining the national guard were both ways of avoiding being sent to Nam, and so Kerry is perfectly correct in his statement.

Witness the worthlessness of the media when they sidestep an elephant (the national guard being called up in Iraq) to raise a canard that doesn't even evidence critical reading skills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-08-04 11:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. It is honoroble to serve in the Guard - it is not honorable to go AWOL
and that is Kerry's point. As is obvious to anyone who does not have a bias against Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-08-04 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I think the point being raised is National Guard service today
Edited on Sun Feb-08-04 11:51 PM by salin
is different than it was in Viet Nam. Kerry is correct that those opting the Guard during Viet Nam were selecting an option that gave a very small likelihood of ever going to Viet Nam. That is point one. Point two are the questions about Bush's absenteeism during that service. Both points are legitimate.

The original post is also correct that this is a silly dodge attempt, and I hope that we don't see it repeated by the media, but if we do - then Kerry should use it as well. The service situation today vs then are very different. Today, with an all volunteer army, the reserves, are just that - on reserve and ready to serve, and in times of war very likely to be called up. During the draft period in Viet Nam, this was not the case. It is also a dodge in that it wants to make the case focus on Guard vs Service (as it did with Dan Quayle, and didn't cause too much damage) - to try to divert the conversation away from bush's awol/absenteeism. So will the media respond and go with the implicit smear on Kerry (bush's claim that the discussion is a maligning of members of the Guard), or will they follow the diversion (and just talk about Guard duty), or will they stick with the story.

If Kerry doesn't already, he should use "Fortunate Son" as a theme song for some of his campaign stops. Helps make that distinction symbolically.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woofless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-09-04 02:51 AM
Response to Original message
3. All of the points above are valid and correct.
I would like to add that it was extremely difficult around that time to get INTO any guard, reseserve or Coast Guard unit. The spaces were filled. The point being that W bumped ahead of a LOT of young men to get his position. There was nothing wrong with trying to stay out of Viet Nam. I enlisted in the Air Force with that goal in mind, and it worked. It almost backfired. They sent half of our tech school class to Bien Hoa as forward air control. I went to Turkey. We did not then nor do we now begrudge those that served in the guard or reserve. Yeah, we ragged them but there was an element of envy there. They were safe.

Woof
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnitaR Donating Member (958 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-09-04 03:26 AM
Response to Original message
4. Does anyone see the irony here?
He is dissing people who joined the Guard because they didn't want to go to war. Well, when he came back from the war didn't he march against it? Didn't he throw medals (not his of course) over the fence in protest of this war?

Why in the world would he diss those who didn't want to die in a war he felt was wrong and that he came out against?

Once again the Senator has his thumb in the wind...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-09-04 03:28 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Actually it is a blatant mischaracterization to say that
he is 'He is dissing people who joined the Guard because they didn't want to go to war. '


That is the exact opposite of what he said.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThoughtCriminal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-09-04 04:12 AM
Response to Original message
6. I did some research
Sorry bookmark is on another computer. About 9000 NG served in Vietnam until Dec, 1969, 23 were killed. A few Air Guard were sent there, five Air Guard servicemen were killed.

That's a pretty small number and I think most realize there was never the slightest chance that Bush's elite unit was going anywhere near combat.

As for the "Insulting the Guard" talking point, it was Bush who showed contempt for the service by abandoning it to work on a politcal campaign and avoid drug tests.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-09-04 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Actually there was ZERO chance that Bush was going anywhere near combat
the fighter jet he trained in was no longer used in combat. It was not deployed overseas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-09-04 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Thanks very much for checking this out
I didn't realize the NG was called up in any substantial numbers. Well, the "Champagne Division" was probably safe, anyway. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC