UPDATE! Kerry On The Killing Fields...AGAIN!!

UPDATE!!

Well? It "IS" settled. John Kerry is actually dumber than a box of turtle turds. All that "D" education gone to waste.

As brought to you previously in this post, here is the continuation...in full. I would LOVE to rant on but the ranting in the following is so much more eloquent. It berates and chastises in such a way that the one being ranted upon would thank the rantee...

One more thing...when one quotes figures and facts, it isn't really a good idea to quote facts and figures compiled by our enemies...is it?

Just curious.


Answering Kerry--II
Our Monday item about John Kerry's Saturday letter about our July 26 op-ed about Kerry's claim that a bloodbath "didn't happen" after America's retreat from Vietnam brought this follow-up from reader R.T. Barber:

I just got around to reading Kerry's attempt to extract himself from his latest verbal quagmire and was stunned at his statement that "450,000 civilians and 1.1 million soldiers were killed" in the eight years preceding the U.S. withdrawal. One of your readers, Betty Tolsma from Shertz, Texas (home to many airmen serving at Randolph Air Force Base), wrote that "Mr. Kerry needs to give academic sources for the civilian (450,000) and military (1.1 million) war deaths which he cites in his response to James Taranto's account of the post-Vietnam debacle."

The Department of Defense figures on U.S. Vietnam War casualties show 47,424 "total hostile deaths" and 58,209 "total in-theater deaths." So from where was the 1.1 million figure derived?

I suspected that South Vietnamese military casualties exceeded U.S. military casualties, but the U.S. Army reported that "South Vietnamese military deaths exceeded 200,000," which if added to U.S. casualties falls far short of the senator's number. A May 2004 report on the differences and similarities between the Vietnamese and Iraq conflicts published by the U.S. Army War College includes the following passage on page 13:

In April 1995 the government in Hanoi announced that Communist forces during the "American period" of the Vietnam War had sustained a loss of 1,100,000 dead, a figure that presumably included the Communists' 300,000 missing in action. (Hanoi also estimated 2,000,000 civilian dead.) This passage includes a citation for the Encyclopedia of the Vietnam War (Spencer C. Tucker, ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 1998).

I'm sure Senator Kerry isn't purposely reciting Communist propaganda in support of his argument.

Hmm, we're actually not so sure. But even if we assume Hanoi's numbers are accurate, consider what Kerry is claiming: that it was worth sacrificing the lives and freedom of the South Vietnamese--our ally--in order to prevent casualties on the enemy side. Imagine what the world would look like if we'd taken that approach during World War II--or, for that matter, what it will look like if we take it with Muslim terrorists.

Any questions? Isn't it a good thing that John Effing Moron and Fraud Kerry never made it to the White House?

Jon Carry Lyes Aboot Blud Baffs Aftur Vetnam

Before I show a video of the moron from Massivetwoshits denying "no one died because the democrats lied" in the aftermath of the military loss we suffered in Vietnam, here is a quip from Don Surber: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in the Senate."

HA! Ain't THAT the truth? Kerry: Moron. Fraud. Jerk. Liar. Scum. Democrat. Leftinistra.

Kerry bath
Uploaded by dollarsandsense123

Honor, Duty, Country?

Truth Be Told

Truth Be Told

Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:49 PM

Honor, Duty, Country…

June 02, 2007
Honor, Duty, Country?
By William F. Buckley

While it is true that no historical event exactly replicates another, it is certainly the case that what happened in Vietnam in 1972-1975 bears very closely on the current situation in Iraq.

To truncate the story drastically, what happened back then was the result of the correlation of four strategic factors:

(1) Hanoi’s resolution to conquer the south. The North Vietnamese were held back by the failure of their spring offensive in 1972. That offensive was weakened by U.S. mining of the harbors and by the reluctance of China, in the swoon of the Nixon visit to Mao, to give full-bodied support to an invasion. But Hanoi simply bided its time.

(2) The withdrawal by the United States, ending in March 1973, of a combative military presence. Only a few hundred U.S. advisers were left in South Vietnam.

(3) The growing stability of the South Vietnamese government, which was assumed competent to carry out the terms of the Paris agreements of 1973. These agreements had been negotiated in dozens and dozens of meetings between Le Duc Tho and Henry Kissinger. The agreements called for the removal of U.S. forces, the cessation of North Vietnamese offensives, and recognition of the Saigon government as the ruling political entity in the south.

And (4) the progressive disunity of the United States government. Here we had the anti-war movement as a continuing force. But that movement attained dominance pari passu with the weakening of President Nixon. As Watergate metastasized from a “second-rate burglary” into grounds for the removal of a president, U.S. support for success in Vietnam wilted.

The parallels in the current situation are plain, beginning with the nature of the United States’ participation. What we have right now is a progressively immobilized executive and a dissenting legislature, leading — inevitably — to an impotent military.

Compassionate Conservatism is NOT working, folks. There are those that know not what we face. I believe that GWB needs to fire his advisors and hire some folks that know our enemy. We ALL can learn of our enemies bt starting here, Studies In Islam (Jihadism). These are the faces of our enemy and the Upper Echelon MUST come to grips with this scourge we face. We are in the correct place in time and locality to defeat these evil elements. Coming to terms here, stateside, is no place to “finally figure it out”.

The question immediately posed is: Do we feel responsibility for what happens in the period ahead? The Iraqi government resembles the government of South Vietnam in 1973-’74 in that Baghdad is fighting, as Saigon fought, for a political system free of overweening foreign elements. But Saigon could not hold out in the long run without U.S. military support, and neither can Baghdad.

If the parallels hold, i.e., if the result of failure in the Middle East is equivalent to the result of failure in Indochina, then we would expect to see the collapse of the Maliki government in Baghdad, some kind of bloody vengeance against Iraqis who had supported that government, and a people subjugated by a regime that sits on 1 percent the world’s supply of oil and is unlikely to proceed indifferent to the march, by Iraq’s eastern neighbor, to becoming a nuclear power.

In the currency of human deaths, it is unlikely that we would match in Iraq what we stood by for in Vietnam. The statistics aren’t even there to count accurately the casualties of defeat in that theater. But the most graphic symbol is the picture of Vietnamese, young and old, clinging to a U.S. helicopter in the desperate, final hope to be taken away from those waiting to torture and kill them. As stated, the statistics are not final, but somewhere between a quarter-million and 2 million or even 3 million Vietnamese suffered from our flight from the burden we first had undertaken, and then abandoned.

Henry Kissinger has said that the use of the American fleet to contain the invasion of 1975 could have saved the day. What could save the day in Iraq? Nothing short of public revulsion toward those Democrats who are measuring these days the political value of honor. In the election ahead, all the world will be looking over our shoulders, including the ghosts of Vietnam.

In the elections ahead, we need leadership that understands the our enemies. We don’t need the political hacks that are only interested in power and control of the helm, steering us into one nightmare after another. For decades, the Islamic menace and threat has attacked the United States the globe over and nothing has been done…until now.

We shall not be victorious until we understand our enemies and THAT MUST begin with the political leadership.

War News

Good and Bad News

Good and Bad News

Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:28 AM

Unfaithful Terrorists Detained

Airmen Missing In Action From Vietnam War Are Identified
This is good and bad news…good that they are finally found but bad because it took so long.