Posted on 10/26/2004 10:29:35 PM PDT by crushelits
NYTrogate, Tora Bora, Put Kerry Back In His Element: Slamming the Military
There's an old saying that you can't teach an old dog new tricks. Well, there's a reason that sayings become "old sayings". Mainly because they've basically been proven correct over time. After listening to John Kerry for the last few days, never has the "old dog" adage been more fitting.
What we're talking about specifically here is John Kerry's slander and criticism of our armed forces. As everyone knows by now, upon his return from Vietnam (John Kerry served in Vietnam, did you know that?) Kerry aided and abetted the enemy with his near-treasonous anti-war activities and speeches calling American soldiers war criminals (one of which spawned our wildly popular original web ad Torture. Not only did he secretly meet with the Communists in Paris during the 1972 peace talks, but yesterday we found out that he was Hanoi's willing puppet, taking orders from them during that time. So it is clear that defaming and insulting the US Military is nothing new to this out of touch gasbag.
But try as he might, Kerry just couldn't abandon his roots, and in the last week has reverted to his true self by slamming the military on a daily basis. This "coming home" is much to the delight of his anti-American, dictator-loving base, symbolized by the moveon.org and Michael Moore crowds.
First of all, to you idiot critics who say "Just show us where he criticized the military. He never did. He supports the troops and thinks they did a great job. It's Bush that's the problem, not our soldiers. He never said that. Waaah, waaah, waaah".
Ok, are you all done? Good. Now shut up and listen. You might learn something.
It is true, Kerry never has overtly criticized our military personnel, but has reveled in showing his defeatist mentality by gleefully criticizing the President for every perceived failure in Iraq and elsewhere. The only problem here is that the two specific items Kerry has been trying tie around the President's neck as "failures", were not decisions made by the President, but rather, by the military commanders in the field and carried out by our troops.
Let's look at the two examples of alleged "failure" cited by Kerry, and then you tell us who he's really criticizing here.
Most recent of course is "NYTrogate", as so eloquently named by the readers of Polipundit.. For those of you living under a rock, here's the quick summary. Yesterday the New York Times, also known as the Kerry mouthpiece, "broke" a story that American forces failed to guard 348,000 tons of the most dangerous conventional explosives called HMX and RDX at an Iraqi weapons storage facility in April, 2003. Those stockpiles simply "disappeared", and are feared to be in the hands of the Iraqi terrorists.
However, in less than a day that little piece of fiction fell apart as NBC News reported that they were embedded with American forces in April, 2003 at the time they captured the weapons storage facility in question (aptly named "Al Quqaa" prounounced "KaKa"- get it?). It turns out that while the American troops did find explosives, none of the HMX or RDX explosives were found. Even a liberal can figure out that this means the HMX and RDX were gone PRIOR to the Americans capturing the weapons storage facility.
But you see, none of this matters to Kerry. He has jumped on this story like a former ex-President who shall remain nameless, liked to jump on porky, unattractive Jewish interns. He is using the story as Exhibit "A" in his contention that the President is an "incredibly incompetent" Commander in Chief and should be voted out. Hell, they love this libelous story so much, they rushed a TV ad onto the air to take advantage of it.
Now here's the rub. Imagine we are living in "Kerryland" and everything he is saying is true. Assume the weapons actually were there and were stolen in one month (a subsequent UN inspection in May, 2003 showed the weapons weren't there) by Iraqi forces. Yes, all 450 TONS of them, just sneaked out without anyone knowing.
Ask yourself this question. Who would be responsible for this horrendous breach of security? Would it be the President, whose job as Commander in Chief is to decide to go to war and ensure the troops on the ground have everything they need? Does anyone in their right mind really believe that the President is the one that makes the literally thousands of military decisions that are made on the ground each day? Does anyone actually think that the President, who is thousands of miles away, was making the final decision on how many troops to deploy at this one site (out of hundreds) to ensure its safety?
Of course no rational person would believe these scenarios. The President does not make the day to day military decisions on troop movements, battle plans, and how to guard various sites.
So who is it that Kerry is really criticizing? The troops on the ground, and the Commanders responsible for ensuring security at these sites. What Kerry is saying is that our military leaders, and the troops that serve under them are incompetent fools who let 450 TONS of very dangerous materials be taken from right under their nose in one month. Keep in mind this isn't some drunken college student stealing a candy bar from a late night convenience store. Imagine how "incredibly incompetent" our military would have to be to allow this to happen.
But that's really what Kerry's saying. It's just like his claims in 1971 that American military leaders were telling troops to rape, pillage and plunder the jungles of south Vietnam. To try to and pin the blame on these supposedly missing weapons on the President is incredibly transparent, and we can imagine it's not going to play to well in military households across America.
The second claim Kerry has been making for weeks is that President Bush let Osama Bin Laden escape at Tora Bora in December, 2001, because the President "took his eye off the ball" by focusing on Iraq. Kerry claims that instead of killing Bin Laden ourselves we "outsourced" the job to the Afghan Northern Alliance, thus allowing Bin Laden to escape.
Let's leave aside for the moment Kerry's own statement in December, 2001 that our Tora Bora strategy was "pretty effective" and that we should "continue to do it that way". Also leave aside for the moment the recent quotes of retired General Tommy Franks who was in charge of the Afghan operation, who wrote in very specific detail about why Kerry's version of Tora Bora "doesn't square with the facts". Finally forget about Colin Powell's recent statement that nobody even knows if Osama was even at Tora Bora at the time.
No, what you should again focus on is exactly who Kerry is criticizing with his statements. There is a reason that our military spends billions of dollars to train military officers the way we do - to allow them to make decisions on how to fight a war. It is not, nor should it be, a President's decision on how to fight a battle. Rather, the President's decision is whether or not to go to war in the first place, and then if he does, to let the military leaders decide how best to win that war.
Anyone with half a brain knows that Tommy Franks and the men under his command know how to go about fighting a war, and specifically here, a mountainous battle, far better than George Bush. Yet, for the perceived failure at Tora Bora, Kerry lays the blame on the President's doorstep. Even if what Kerry is saying is true, how would it be the President's fault?
Taken to its logical conclusion Kerry is saying that if he were President, Osama would have been dead or captured at Tora Bora. If you believe that you have to believe that Kerry would have, on his own, come up with a specific battle plan on how to get Osama.
Would he really have us believe that he knows better than the military leaders that are actually there and dealing with the day to day on the ground reality how to execute a military plan? If so, anyone who would vote for him is an F-ing lunatic.
We can just imagine a President Kerry in the Situation Room over a map of some hellhole telling the military on the ground how John "Patton" Kerry would handle this battle, and then start moving around little models like he was playing a real life version of the game of "Risk".
Thus, if in the next few days you see a twinkle in the eye of John Kerry you'll know why. It's because he's back in his favorite element - having a national stage in which to slam the US Military for political gain. Well guess what Senator - we all get the last laugh come Tuesday.
I thought it was Ammogate or QaaQaaGate
HOORAH BUMP!!!!!
Bullseye....Right on target,.... Thanks
The 1971 John F*ckin' is showing his true colors. And besidesc the bash-the-military aspect of this, the thing that's funny is Kerry howling we should have gone into Iraq to secure the darned explosives. This after a year of maintaining we were involved in the "wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place." Can you say flip-flop?
For the sake of the Viet Nam Vets and POWs, for the sake of our current military, please let the country see Kerry for the loser that we all know that he is. Between the MSM, the fraudulent voting and George Soros, this has been a really long hard battle. The positive thing is the huge crowds the President has been drawing. Dufus, the Traitor, cannot win this election.
"I was against the war before I was for it." - John F*ckin' quote.
BTTT
During the debates I was saying the same thing - that Kerry was slamming the military when he slammed Bush !
Poodle POS
Good article.... are you affiliated with CrushKerry.com?
One of my many favorite daily Blogs.....
|
|
||
| Rush just read a CNN story from 1/2003 "Al Aqaa a WMD site"...anyone have a link (vanity) | ||
| The Iraqi explosives story CBS and the New York Times ran yesterday is a fraud. These weapons were not there when US troops went to this site in 2003. The IAEA and its head, the anti-American Mohammed El Baradei, leaked a false letter on this issue to the media to embarrass the Bush administration. Here you go: http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/01/24/sprj.irq.inspections/index.html Here is a link to DRUDGE story on it: Fox also had an article about Qa Qaa Site: |
||
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.