I'd like your thoughts

[BRH]

To add on, Grant was a huge war hero, bigger then Kennedy, Kerry and anyone else out there, that ever considered being president.

8463[/snapback]

Eisenhower wasn't a huge war hero?

 

But you're right about Grant's presidency.

[SD Jarhead]

Count me in with those who are completely sick and tired of hearing about the whole Vietnam did/didn't go nonsense. I also feel that JK set himself up for the attacks by making his service in that war the centerpiece of his campaign strategy.

 

With that said, I know I am jumping late into the fray, but I'd like to comment on BiB's initial post. As someone who has served in the Corps for almost 20 years, my judgement and opinion are formed by my experience as a Marine. Those experiences are likely to be much different than those who served in other services due to 'cultural differences'. I've got to tell you that in all honesty, when I hear about awards for valor being awarded by other services, I automaticly discount the award, in my minds eye.

 

For example, a few years ago there was a story of some Air Force support personnel who were stationed in Kansas City who wrote themselves up for a Bronze Star and were awarded it without ever leaving the comfort of home(the US). If you look at more recent times and compare the number of awards for valor issued by the Army as compared to the USMC, the statistics show that the army is much more liberal than the Corps(by a WIDE margin). Shoot, if any of you can get a copy of this weeks Marine Times, there's a story of a Gunny who earned a Silver Star at Nasiriah. He had 40 shrapnel wounds and continued to fight. Check it out and see what he did to earn his S. Star vice JK's. That's just one example of many I'm familiar with.

 

The story posted about the soldier not wanting to leave his unit is the type of devotion to duty that I am familiar with. I say all this to explain how I form my opinion of what is known about JK's time spent in combat. All indications to me are that he is a glory seeking cheesedick who left his men to return to his self described manifest destiny of becoming the next 'JFK'.

 

Each person who served will have their own perception of JK's service. From my vantage point, considering the facts that are undisputed by either camp, JK at his core is not a true leader of men. That is just how I feel. I think that most veterans who have been in the stevestojan with thier men would likely feel the same.

 

Excellent thread BiB.

[SD Jarhead]

After re-reading what I just posted, I want to be clear...I am not flaming other services or suggesting that the Corps corners the market on bravery...I just tried to explain my point of view. So, please don't let this degrade into an interservice skirmish.

[IDBillzFan]

 

Now he didn't even serve his country, according to you.

 

You guys have got to be kidding me.

8309[/snapback]

BRH, with a comment like that you have officially sunk to some pretty incredible depths.

 

Once again...and I hope I am telling you libs for the last time...read first, then think, then write.

 

You Pollys get to the very first thing you think you're supposed to disagree with, and then green puss starts oozing out of every irrational hole in your body before you take just one solemn moment to take the entire conversation in context.

 

Just amazing. You ARE a part of Kerry's campaign, right? 'Cuz I'd LOVE to think you're contributing to his future.

[Alaska Darin]

After re-reading what I just posted, I want to be clear...I am not flaming other services or suggesting that the Corps corners the market on bravery...I just tried to explain my point of view. So, please don't let this degrade into an interservice skirmish.

8559[/snapback]

I knew exactly what you meant. One of the reasons I left the Air Force was the lack of "culture" cultivated by the "leadership." Most people don't even realize they are in the !@#$ing military. One of my final point papers was on making the Air Force more Marine.

 

No offense taken here.

[SactoBillFan]

I posted the same thought, more or less in a few places-but it gets lost. Have any of you trying to convince the others that Kerry is this magnificant war hero thought about this? This is something that truly bothers me about Kerry's character. ...

8138[/snapback]

 

Just curious, how old were you when the Viet Nam "conflict" ended? Ever spent a day in the military? Ever studied what the conflict was about and made an opinion as to whether it was a "moral" or "legal" conflict? Ever taken a step back and attempted one step in Kerry's moccasins given the time and the place? Try and answer these questions honestly.

 

Kerry's service would truly be a non issue if it weren't for the current administration using the politics of fear to show for some unfathonable reason that the current President is the most desirable candidate as Commander in Chief. I think it's called political strategy. It's all horse manure, as long as Karl Rove can keep the issue on Kerry's Viet Nam record he can avoid debating real issues. IMO B)

[Guest RabidBillsFanVT]

I posted the same thought, more or less in a few places-but it gets lost. Have any of you trying to convince the others that Kerry is this magnificant war hero thought about this? This is something that truly bothers me about Kerry's character. I imagine that many of you have not worn the uniform, let alone have been shot at in one. It's just my experience, maybe some of you know different-that anyone fitting the scenario described above would be considered at best, a slacker and at worst, a coward. This could maybe be expected of a private draftee, but not of an officer who swore an oath and supposedly lives by the principle of "Know your men and always look out for their welfare". He not only abandoned his command, he returned home and assaulted the honor and dignity of those he abandoned. I am reminded of a story I heard on NPR, of all places of a young Army Sergeant recently seriously wounded in Iraq. He was brought back to Walter Reed, received treatment and therapy and was being interviewed from-guess where? Iraq. As soon as he were able he returned to his unit because (paraphrasing, I don't recall the exact words) "This is my unit, these are my buddies-and I don't feel right sitting there in the states while they continue the fight. We went there together, and we'll come home together".

 

This from a 20 something junior NCO. An infantry team leader.

 

That, my friends is the band of brothers. That is reporting for duty. Not this charade being argued about day after day after day.

 

Will you please, at least consider this? I don't know how many of you out there have-but I've been in these types of situations and have witnessed myself the quiet courage that doesn't make the headlines, never gets heard about at all. People who did their jobs, looked out for their fellow soldiers, sometimes paying a price-but for the most part doing it in quiet dignity. It would never have occurred to these men in a thousand years to come home and throw their medals, go on TV and talk about the atrocities their brothers committed...it just wouldn't happen.

 

End of rant. End of plea. I just ask that you at least consider this.

8138[/snapback]

 

I woul consider this, most certainly. I can't speak for Taxachusetts, but I wouldn't elect him if he were in MY state... Vietnam was a totally different war, one that REALLY fractured our country.

 

I know all about awards, and believe me, the last time I checked, soldiers/sailors don't put in for their OWN awards! You know as well as *I* do that officers always seem to get a LOT of these awards, while us enlisted get one from time to time; it's understood politics. I don't see how you can knock the man on the PH's, BUT what he did after and the way he handled it was wrong, I agree. A LOT of things that happened in that time in history were wrong, and so we suffer massively for it today. The whole Vietnam Era was crap...

 

The fact remains that Bush STILL did not serve his country over there and took the easy way out. When you are faced with a protracted jungle war against an enemy you can't find, you quickly see why war is the last option, and NOT one of the first. It's an experience you can't get while being National Guard. I'd be more angry at the man who avoided doing his duty to the country rather than the man who squawks about how the war was evil, and war crimes were committed AFTER he fought over there.

[Alaska Darin]

Just curious, how old were you when the Viet Nam "conflict" ended? Ever spent a day in the military? Ever studied what the conflict was about and made an opinion as to whether it was a "moral" or "legal" conflict? Ever taken a step back and attempted one step in Kerry's moccasins given the time and the place? Try and answer these questions honestly.

 

Kerry's service would truly be a non issue if it weren't for the current administration using the politics of fear to show for some unfathonable reason that the current President is the most desirable candidate as Commander in Chief. I think it's called political strategy. It's all horse manure, as long as Karl Rove can keep the issue on Kerry's Viet Nam record he can avoid debating real issues. IMO  B)

8589[/snapback]

Ah, yet another "know it all FNG." My favorite.

 

BIB is a retired decorated combat veteran with over 90 times more military experience than John Kerry. Before you start questioning somebody else's credentials, you ought to establish your own. Care to rephrase the questions now?

 

As a military person, I don't care if a conflict is moral or legal and it's not my place to discern such things. There is an oath, after all. I also wouldn't piss on my brothers I left behind the way John Kerry did. His actions upon returning to this country were disgusting.

 

His service wouldn't be an issue if he actually had something else to run on.

[SactoBillFan]

BIB is a retired decorated combat veteran with over 90 times more military experience than John Kerry.  Before you start questioning somebody else's credentials, you ought to establish your own.  Care to rephrase the questions now?

 

As a military person, I don't care if a conflict is moral or legal and it's not my place to discern such things.  There is an oath, after all.  I also wouldn't piss on my brothers I left behind the way John Kerry did.  His actions upon returning to this country were disgusting.

 

His service wouldn't be an issue if he actually had something else to run on.

8597[/snapback]

 

I think I knew that BIB was a veteran. The oath you took was to defend your country. Not to become a "lemming" for your government. Taking a stand isn't taking a "piss on my brothers". Sorry you couldn't hack it as a lifer, bit I don't think you had it in you to begin with. You took a stand, no need to be ashamed.

[Alaska Darin]

I think I knew that BIB was a veteran. The oath you took was to defend your country. Not to become a "lemming" for your government. Taking a stand isn't taking a "piss on my brothers". Sorry you couldn't hack it as a lifer, bit I don't think you had it in you to begin with. You took a stand, no need to be ashamed.

8603[/snapback]

That's why you asked him if he ever spent a day in the military, right Sparky?

 

Oh, I get it. Defend John Kerry by attempting to degrade another veteran (who served 36 times longer than your boyfriend) using similiar tactics to those you're whining about. Just another piece of **** liberal hypocrite. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain:

[ExiledInIllinois]

Are these vets and I guess you guys so thinned skinned that coming back and having one of your fellow soldiers complain/protest actually affects them? I guess some real crazy crap went on that they just can't come to terms with.

 

So what? He kissed and told. Get a life and get over it.

 

I never spent a day in the military... Thank God... I just work for the Corps as a civilian... Pretty bizarre in itself!

 

My father always said, "Never, never go in the service, unless you need to or after college". Guess what dad? I went to UB for four years and landed a job with the USACE.

 

All you gung-ho types... I guess Iraq is pretty FUBAR'ed... They are looking for bodies left and right... Fellow employee just got back, and they already called him and asked if he wanted to be re-deployed. No thanks...

 

It is the wild west out there boyzzz, go for it!

[VABills]

I never spent a day in the military... Thank God... I just work for the Corps as a civilian... Pretty bizarre in itself!

8610[/snapback]

 

Which Corps? Corps of Engineers or the US Marine Corps? If so where? Let me know because I will ensure you get the proper attitude adjustment needed.

[Guest RabidBillsFanVT]

Which Corps?  Corps of Engineers or the US Marine Corps?  If so where?  Let me know because I will ensure you get the proper attitude adjustment needed.

8630[/snapback]

 

UMMM, USACE IS the Army Corps of Engineers....

 

My grandfather was a MSGT in the Phillippines for the USACE, and no one doing that job would have refused to be re-deployed. THAT'S BECAUSE World War II had purpose and needed to be fought. I sincerely doubt he would have agreed with the useless way this recent war has turned out!

 

He said gung-ho types, which means the 'agree with everything in Iraq at all costs'... let's go find Osama, the real enemy, not some Iraqi hiding in a mosque.

[VABills]

UMMM, USACE IS the Army Corps of Engineers....

 

My grandfather was a MSGT in the Phillippines for the USACE, and no one doing that job would have refused to be re-deployed. THAT'S BECAUSE World War II had purpose and needed to be fought. I sincerely doubt he would have agreed with the useless way this recent war has turned out!

 

He said gung-ho types, which means the 'agree with everything in Iraq at all costs'... let's go find Osama, the real enemy, not some Iraqi hiding in a mosque.

8634[/snapback]

That's what I thought. The rest of the free world refers to the US Marine Corps as "the Corps", but of course that bunch likes to use the term for themselves. That way they can feel more important, like someone who actually deserves the title.

[Guest RabidBillsFanVT]

That's what I thought.  The rest of the free world refers to the US Marine Corps as "the Corps", but of course that bunch likes to use the term for themselves.  That way they can feel more important, like someone who actually deserves the title.

8636[/snapback]

 

Hey, I'm just saying!! Some people can be Marines, and some can't...

 

I'm in that can't category because I wasn't blessed with physical strength, but I still respect them so very much, but I don't say that to them in person of course.

Although I totally disagree a lot of times with the conservative right and their agendas, when it's time to do the job, it's ON.

 

Gotta keep the Navy pride going!

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

That's what I thought.  The rest of the free world refers to the US Marine Corps as "the Corps", but of course that bunch likes to use the term for themselves.  That way they can feel more important, like someone who actually deserves the title.

8636[/snapback]

 

Cut it out. What did the Marine Corps trademark the term. Anyway, wasn't the Army Corps of Engineers formed right after the Battle of Bunker Hill, 1775? Didn't the Continental Congress authorize it then?

 

What is the Marine Corps birthday? Does 1775 beat it, I am pretty sure it does, whose the wannabee?

 

Essayons!

[VABills]

Cut it out.  What did the Marine Corps trademark the term.  Anyway, wasn't the Army Corps of Engineers formed right after the Battle of Bunker Hill, 1775?  Didn't the Continental Congress authorize it then?

 

What is the Marine Corps birthday?  Does 1775 beat it, I am pretty sure it does, whose the wannabee?

 

Essayons!

8657[/snapback]

Check that, The Marine Corps was established in a bar in 1775. You can't beat that because we are the only service that was basically put together by a drunk bunch of SOB's.

[ExiledInIllinois]

I think I got you beat by 5 months...

 

USACE:

 

Branch Type: Combat Arms

 

Birthday: Continental Congress authority for a "Chief Engineer for the Army" dates from 16 June 1775. A Corps of Engineers for the United States was authorized by the Congress on 11 Mar 1779. The Corps of Engineers, as it is known today, came into being on 16 March 1802, when the President was authorized to "organize and establish a Corps of Engineers... that the said Corps...shall be stationed at West Point in the State of New York and shall constitute a Military Academy." A Corps of Topographical Engineers, authorized on 4 July 1838, was merged with the Corps of Engineers on 3 March 1963.

 

 

USMC:

 

Establishment of the Marine Corps, 10 November 1775

This resolution of the Continental Congress marked the establishment of what is now the United States Marine Corps.

 

 

"Resolved, That two Battalions of marines be raised, consisting of one Colonel, two Lieutenant Colonels, two Majors, and other officers as usual in other regiments; and that they consist of an equal number of privates with other battalions; that particular care be taken, that no persons be appointed to office, or inlisted into said Battalions, but such as are good seamen, or so acquainted with maritime affairs as to be able to serve to advantage by sea when required: that they be inlisted and commissioned to serve for and during the present war between Great Britain and the colonies, unless dismissed by order of Congress: that they be distinguished by the names of the first and second battalions of American Marines, and that they be considered part of the number which the continental Army before Boston is ordered to consist of."

[VABills]

I think I got you beat by 5 months...

 

USACE:

 

Branch Type: Combat Arms

 

Birthday: Continental Congress authority for a "Chief Engineer for the Army" dates from 16 June 1775. A Corps of Engineers for the United States was authorized by the Congress on 11 Mar 1779. The Corps of Engineers, as it is known today, came into being on 16 March 1802, when the President was authorized to "organize and establish a Corps of Engineers... that the said Corps...shall be stationed at West Point in the State of New York and shall constitute a Military Academy." A Corps of Topographical Engineers, authorized on 4 July 1838, was merged with the Corps of Engineers on 3 March 1963.

USMC:

 

Establishment of the Marine Corps, 10 November 1775

This resolution of the Continental Congress marked the establishment of what is now the United States Marine Corps.

"Resolved, That two Battalions of marines be raised, consisting of one Colonel, two Lieutenant Colonels, two Majors, and other officers as usual in other regiments; and that they consist of an equal number of privates with other battalions; that particular care be taken, that no persons be appointed to office, or inlisted into said Battalions, but such as are good seamen, or so acquainted with maritime affairs as to be able to serve to advantage by sea when required: that they be inlisted and commissioned to serve for and during the present war between Great Britain and the colonies, unless dismissed by order of Congress: that they be distinguished by the names of the first and second battalions of American Marines, and that they be considered part of the number which the continental Army before Boston is ordered to consist of."

8660[/snapback]

 

So you were authorized first but not established until much later. We were authorized and established on the same day. We don't !@#$ around. Even then it was tell us what to do and it was done immediately. Your group !@#$ed around for years, until you came together. Typical Army.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Technically... I guess... The Corps celebrates "Corps Day" every June... So I guess they count June 16, 1775. It was the fortifications at Bunker Hill (Breed's), June 17, 1775... that actually got the ball rolling???

 

??

 

The way it shaped up after the Rev, Lewis and Clark and all that was more or less putting down the weapons during peace time, start digging and building an emerging nation. There are still two distinct missions, one civilian and one military.

 

Does it really matter??...

 

Anyway, I am not as irreverent in person.

 

Stay cool!

 

B)