| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| Home Front: Politix | |||
| 12 Generals and Admirals Endorse John Kerry | |||
| 2004-07-29 | |||
Extremely EFL: In an unprecedented display of support from the
| |||
| Posted by:Steve |
| #34 Zhang...my apologies if I confused you with some other "z" sounding troll. I haven't been in here for awhile so maybe I'm thinking Zenster or someone else who always pretends to be a Bush supporter while getting in the digs. |
| Posted by: B 2004-07-30 12:50:15 AM |
| #33 tu: Stanfield Turner. Head of the CIA under the late, great Jimmah Carter. You make the good or bad call. This guy presumably told Carter to ask the Shah to leave rather than fight the mullahs during the Iranian Revolution. Ayatollah Khomeini thanked Carter by taking American Embassy personnel hostage. Now this is what I call intelligence failure. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-29 11:48:15 PM |
| #32 Stanfield Turner. Head of the CIA under the late, great Jimmah Carter. You make the good or bad call. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-07-29 11:31:50 PM |
| #31 Jen, I was not privy to that info. Thanks. .com, awesome pic, that one will be circulated to my lads at home & abroad. |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-07-29 11:21:00 PM |
| #30 Pappy, I recognize the name Stanfield Turner, but I don't know why. Is he a good guy or a bad guy? |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-07-29 11:07:00 PM |
| #29 Crowe was one of the first to endorse Clinton, just about the time the whole draft-dodging flap came out. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2004-07-29 11:05:09 PM |
| #28 I thought he was famous for being on "Cheers". |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-07-29 9:23:54 PM |
| #27 Isn't Admiral Willian J. Crowe admired by historical revisionists worldwide for his anti-Israeli zeal concerning the U.S.S. Liberty incident? |
| Posted by: borgboy 2004-07-29 9:20:03 PM |
| #26 Dotcom, love it! Tommy Franks Rulz! |
| Posted by: GreatestJeneration 2004-07-29 7:34:13 PM |
| #25 Jen - Here's my favorite Tommy Franks image, heh. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-07-29 7:17:12 PM |
| #24 Jarhead, heard any buzz about Gen. Tommy Franks's book that comes out next week? He says it's going to put both some GOPers and Dimocrats in their places... I can't wait! Hit pre-order on Amazon. |
| Posted by: GreatestJeneration 2004-07-29 7:06:44 PM |
| #23 Frankly B, I don't recall ever seeing you around these parts before while Zhang has been posting well thought out bits for at least a year. I suspect you are fooling yourself more than you are fooling rantburgers. |
| Posted by: Yank 2004-07-29 6:56:48 PM |
| #22 80%+ in the mil usually vote repub. Though I can't espouse a particular political affiliation in uniform, if any of my Marines ask me who I'm voting for - I'm up front about it. If they ask me why, I'm up front about that as well. I'm just not allowed to urge them to vote for a particular party though *I can* urge them just to vote. Me and a couple of other officers have decided that no self-respecting patriotic heterosexual white male could ever vote dem and look himself in the mirror. |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-07-29 6:51:59 PM |
| #21 Quite frankly, Iâm impressed by this. I donât know how many of thousands of retired flags there are in this country, but that they managed to get a grand total of 12 to speak on behalf of Kerry speaks volumes. |
| Posted by: B 2004-07-29 6:36:23 PM |
| #20 Mr. Davis -- Zinni is on record as saying that he will probably vote for President Bush despite his opposition to the Iraq War. |
| Posted by: Tibor 2004-07-29 6:00:27 PM |
| #19 I'm honestly surprised that I don't see Eric Shinseki's name on this list -- or is he still active (thought he'd retired last year). |
| Posted by: snellenr 2004-07-29 4:40:56 PM |
| #18 How does Kerry rebut charges when his entire chain of command is opposed to him. Simple, Kerry and his media lapdogs simply label the Swiftboat Veterans For Truth as a RNC front and fail to mention that a good number of them are Democrats. That is what very little coverage the mass media allowed about it. It was never mentioned on ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN/BBC except to tell everyone that it was a RNC front. (However if a minor Kerry supporter farts it headline news...). |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-07-29 4:01:39 PM |
| #17 You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you canât fool all of the people all of the time. I suspect you are fooling yourself more than you are fooling rantburgers. |
| Posted by: B 2004-07-29 1:12:54 PM |
| #16 B: Oh please Zhang Feiâ¦this whole âBush canât readâ meme is so lame. I think you reading too much into that statement - this has nothing to do with his intellectual acuity, and everything to do with avoiding analysis paralysis. Everyone has thousands of reasons for not acting, especially in a venture like Iraq. Sometimes, you just have to tune out the worst case possibilities - hence the part about not thinking about them. Getting too paranoid about what can go wrong (Clinton's major failing in fighting terror or confronting North Korea) is a recipe for getting nothing done. That's all I was saying. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-29 12:59:06 PM |
| #15 âwhether he's thought about it or not â Oh please Zhang Feiâ¦this whole âBush canât readâ meme is so lame. Yeahâ¦like they all sat around the Oval Office as well as the Pentagon and it never even occurred to anyoneâ¦especially not Bush, since he canât read (cue the hysterical laughter), â¦this divine wisdom that the war might not end with the entire world holding hands and singing Kumbaya. You know, Iâm always amazed how that âBush canât readâ joke gets laughter and applause every time single time itâs told. And itâs told so often. And I just have to ask myself about the people who are laughing at it. Itâs a slam on Bush that is completely, 100% devoid of any element that might be mistaken for witâ¦especially since Bush can read. When people laugh at not-witty jokes it says something about their own wit. When you think that Bush never considered some of the glaringly obvious outcomes that you suggest⦠it says the same thing to me - whatever that may be - that Iâm hearing every time I hear your compatriots roll with laughter, at that just-not-witty âBush canât readâ joke. Duhâ¦huh..huhâ¦he said, Bush canât read. Cue the laughter, Bevisâ¦.er I mean Zhang Fei. |
| Posted by: B 2004-07-29 12:31:41 PM |
| #14 Steve- If Mike McPeak told me the sun came up in the east and the sky would be blue, I would get at least three people to confirm it for me. He did more damage to the USAF in the short time he ran it than the every other enemy we've ever had combined. Mike |
| Posted by: Anonymous5933 2004-07-29 12:24:24 PM |
| #13 ZF: The way I look at things now is that it is 1937/38 all over again. Rather than let Hitler take the Sudetenland (sp?) and annex Austria, we are cutting him off at the knees. Not a perfect analogy by a long shot, but the point is that we are taking the fight to the Jihadis before they become more powerful ie have lots of wmd's. This is clearly an alternative strategy to the one we would historically take. Is it correct? While I believe it is...who knows. The rush to judgement is foolish on all sides. Regardless, I think it is best to put the strategy in play and see it through to a point where results, one way or the other, are clear. |
| Posted by: remote man 2004-07-29 12:21:01 PM |
| #12 An oldie but goodie: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth An unprecedented meeting of Vietnam war Swift Boat veterans was held Washington, D.C. on Tuesday, May 4th, to oppose Sen. John F. Kerry's candidacy for the presidency on the grounds that he was "unfit" to be Commander-In-Chief. ... More than 200 Swift Boat officers and men signed the letter to Kerry, including all of Kerry's commanding officers, in response to a query sent out by Admiral Hoffman, former Lt. Cdr. John O'Neill (also of Kerry's Coastal Division 11), and others. How does Kerry rebut charges when his entire chain of command is opposed to him. I don't think anything like this has ever happened. Too bad the media ignores it. |
| Posted by: ed 2004-07-29 12:06:37 PM |
| #11 ZF: In invading Iraq, GWB has effectively decided, whether he's thought about it or not, that developments in all of these areas will resolve in America's favor or that success in Iraq will make them irrelevant. Another possibility is that he's decided that the War on Terror will be a long fight, and he's hunkering down for a succession of wars with other enemies of the US. Perhaps the world will discover that once GWB sets his mind on something, he is implacable, within the limits of political possibility. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-29 12:04:05 PM |
| #10 MD: Thanks Zhang. I sure had gotten the opposite impression. I think he sees the campaign in Iraq as unnecessary and perhaps harmful from a strategic standpoint, not an "America is the root of all evil" standpoint. He's not sure the situation in Iraq will resolve to our advantage or to the Army's advantage, given the complexities involving relations with friendly Arab governments, their hostile publics and a host of unknown unknowns*. I see where he's coming from, but disagree anyway. * Will terror recruitment pick up? Will Muslim governments collectively agree to defy the US about anti-American terror sponsorship or tolerance? Will Muslim governments turn towards Iran, China or Russia as their primary protectors? In invading Iraq, GWB has effectively decided, whether he's thought about it or not, that developments in all of these areas will resolve in America's favor or that success in Iraq will make them irrelevant. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-29 12:00:07 PM |
| #9 Thanks Zhang. I sure had gotten the opposite impression. |
| Posted by: Mr. Davis 2004-07-29 11:48:12 AM |
| #8 MD: Where's Zinni? I thought be'd be a Kerry booster for sure. Must be holding out for a cabinet post. I think Zinni's a Republican. A paleo-conservative Republican who happened to be opposed to the war in Iraq. He's grousing about Iraq, but I doubt he would ever endorse Kerry, any more than Pat Buchanan would. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-29 11:45:23 AM |
| #7 tu: The key word here? "Retired". So who gives a shit. Serving military men aren't allowed to endorse political candidates. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-29 11:42:37 AM |
| #6 Where's Zinni? I thought be'd be a Kerry booster for sure. Must be holding out for a cabinet post. |
| Posted by: Mr. Davis 2004-07-29 11:32:44 AM |
| #5 Hey everyone is entitled to their opinion. This is just a counter to the book that just came out about Kerry and his movie production in Vietnam. I donât know most of these except for General McPeak. He is every bit of a elitist as Kerry. I know nothing about his early service but his last couples of assignments were given to him by seniority alone and not necessarily by merit. Yes his was the Air Force Chief of Staff but that is because the man before him got fired and they needed a replacement. One was needed quickly because of the run-up to Desert Storm. McPeak was planning his retirement as PACAF commander and was passed over by Bush I. Of course love from the troops was never a measure of the Commander or Patton would be relegated to a very small place in history. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) 2004-07-29 11:11:36 AM |
| #4 It's a traditional thing. BTW I should have been president or at least assistant commander in chief under slow Bob Taft. Instead my ass just faded away, and damn faster than I thought. Did you know I'm dead? I'll never forget my last vist to West Point, The Corpse, The Corpse, The Corpse. Most folks didn't realize I was talking about the number of USMC I managed to kill. |
| Posted by: DougOut Doug 2004-07-29 11:03:51 AM |
| #3 The key word here? "Retired". So who gives a shit. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-07-29 11:01:51 AM |
| #2 I expect more from a Marine: General Joseph Hoar (United States Marine Corps, Retired) |
| Posted by: Dragon Fly 2004-07-29 10:55:18 AM |
| #1 I wonder if GWB is going to assemble a contending list. And if the mass media will publicize that list. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-29 10:48:58 AM |
