Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Kerry Pretty Hypocritical Re: Body Armor Comment  
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1345 times:

Remember Kerry accusing Bush of sending troops into war and forcing the soldiers' families to buy them body armor because the military had insufficient supplies? And of course, somehow it was directly Bush's fault. Emphasis is mine.



Who Needs Weapons?
It’s good we didn’t listen to Kerry back in ’84.

By Rep. J. D. Hayworth

"We are continuing a defense buildup that is consuming our resources with weapons systems that we don't need and can't use." — John Kerry in 1984 on the Reagan defense build-up.

What are some of these weapons systems that John Kerry said "we don't need and can't use?" The list might surprise you. It includes many of the most important weapons in our arsenal and weapons that have performed brilliantly in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Among the systems John Kerry said he wanted to cancel were the B-1 bomber, the Apache helicopter, the Patriot anti-missile system, the Aegis cruiser, the AV-8B Harrier jump jet, the F-15, the F-14 A and D models, the Phoenix air-to-air missile, and the Sparrow air-to-air missile. And those Tomahawk cruise missiles that have become the standoff weapon of choice? Kerry wanted to cut the program in half.

That's what makes the recent charge by John Kerry that troops have had to buy their own body armor so hypocritical. Because if John Kerry had had his way, our troops would have had to buy their own tanks, their own fighter jets, their own missiles, their own helicopters, their own warships, their own...you get the idea. (For the record, according to the Pentagon, all troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have body armor.)

His attack also ignores the fact that funding for additional body armor was contained in the $87 billion bill funding operations in Iraq and Afghanistan that John Kerry voted against (after he voted for it, of course).

Imagine what today's military would look like without the Apache helicopter; without the B-1 bomber; and without the F-15 or the F-14. Remember the thrill we all had during the first Gulf War each time a Patriot missile shot down one of Saddam's Scuds? If the country had listened to John Kerry in 1984, all of Saddam's Scuds would have gotten through.

Just a little while ago, critics were wrongly suggesting that Iraq is another Vietnam. While we may not be fighting another Vietnam, John Kerry would have us fighting in Iraq with the same weapons.

— The Honorable J. D. Hayworth is a Republican congressman from Arizona.


Does seem hypocritical, doesn't it?

51 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1326 times:

Dude, Bush got his 87 billion to piss away in Iraq. Even thou Kerry voted against it.... So why hasn't Bush bought our boys their body armor ??? He got the cash for it ??? Maybe its because Hillaburton needs the money ???


Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
User currently offlineTYSGoVols From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 634 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1324 times:

Or it may just be that pesky rebuilding Iraq thing?

<>< Garen



Rocky Top You'll Always be home sweet home to me, Good ole' Rocky Top WOOOOO
User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1315 times:

f-14s are obsolete and are getting replaced with super hornets.
phoenix are limited to the f14 hence useless, besides aim-7 and aim-54c are getting replaced with aim-120s anyway
just a few obviously wrong points.
besides a thinner military is always better. how can anyone not support u.s. military spending cuts? they waste BILLIONS A DAY for nothing.



10=2
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1303 times:

It's foolish to post a response without reading a post well first.

1984

User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1300 times:

As usual the right engages in double speak. The dishonorable JD Hayworth's words need some dissection.

A lot of the military spending programs on the 80s were inextricably linked to Reagan's hoky Star Wars buildup. Which meant that many, if not all, military appropriations had huge star wars riders built into them. A vote against a military spending program because of cost overruns or SDI/STar Wars absurd elements is often the necessary thing to do. Needless to say, Kerry has voted for numerous military appropriations. However, GOP cronyism and favoritism towards big defense contractors in the go-go 80s (remember those HUGE deficits caused by military spending?) had to be curtailed, especially when linked to bogus SDI plans.



User currently offlinePhxairfan From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 811 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1289 times:

A letter like that is why I am voting for J.D Hayworth for as long as they consider me an Arizona resident. I think that although the military does spend a lot of money, and get reamed by the companies they buy from. That their current expenditures are necessary. Although I think they did the right thing in cutting the Comanche program, as it is not needed. I hope to god John Kerry doesn't get elected, because if he does I guarantee you that America will become the new France.

User currently offlineBN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5618 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1279 times:

Among the systems John Kerry said he wanted to cancel were the B-1 bomber, the Apache helicopter, the Patriot anti-missile system, the Aegis cruiser, the AV-8B Harrier jump jet, the F-15, the F-14 A and D models, the Phoenix air-to-air missile, and the Sparrow air-to-air missile. And those Tomahawk cruise missiles that have become the standoff weapon of choice? Kerry wanted to cut the program in half.

MD90 post the exact quote where Kerry said he wanted to eliminate all this.

1. Half that stuff is crap! Except for the Cruise missiles!

2. It's fact that the body armor ordered by the military us flawed and cannot perform as advertised.

3. My brother said when he went to Iraq on average each guy spend (from their own pockets) between $1200 - $1500 per man to replace items from GPS units,cold/hot weather gear to flak-vest to 'cover their own asses' since they were headed for combat!

Kerry just knows what many of us either suspect or know to be fact...that government contractors DO NOT have the best interest of our troops at heart...thier number one priority is getting that government contract first and increasing the profit margin second..even if it means implementing cost-cutting measures and delivering a far inferior product than promised!


BN747



"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
User currently offlinePhxairfan From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 811 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1274 times:

France is a nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to trade in my balls to live there. But boy can they cook.

User currently offlineTYSGoVols From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 634 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1268 times:

There has only been one U.S. President that has been convicted of lying to the American public in recent history. As for bush I still don't see any evidence of a lie.

<>< Garenn



Rocky Top You'll Always be home sweet home to me, Good ole' Rocky Top WOOOOO
User currently offlineBN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5618 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1258 times:

And if the question he lied to... were asked under oath..to 41 other presidents and YOU...you would be convicted for lying to the American public too!


Get off the anti-sex thing dude...it's getting ancient!

BN747



"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
User currently offlineTYSGoVols From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 634 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1256 times:

How do you personally know what I or the other 41 Presidents would do under oath. There is that whole swear to tell teh truth and nothing but the truth thing. If I make a statement like that trust me I would tell the truth. You do not know me, you do not know the other 41 Presidents that you speak of, nor have some of them been alive during your lifetime. You are making a blanket statement about something you have no clue about. The thing isn't the sex thing, he can be forgiven of that but, he LIED about it. It makes me wonder about what else he lied to us about and is still lying about.

<>< Garen



Rocky Top You'll Always be home sweet home to me, Good ole' Rocky Top WOOOOO
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1246 times:

France is o.k. with me...Germany too. At least they're not lying greedy scum bags like Bush & clan.

Hmmm... I see you have not been reading up on French politics. Chirac is as corrupt as they come, and the only reason he is not in jail is that a tame judge declared the president completely immune to prosecution as long as he is in office. He would have certainly lost the election last year had it not been for the far-right candidate who won the first round, and then he would have been tried and probably convicted for corruption. And the Iraqis have since uncovered plenty of evidence pointing to France's monetary reasons for wanting Saddam to stay in power.

As for Bush & Co., I have read a lot of accusations of corruption from partisan sources (and we heard the same for Clinton), but no actual evidence so far.

Charles


User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1238 times:

" I guarantee you that America will become the new France."

whats the new france? care to elaborate? you do imply it would be something negative, hence i'd like to know in which regard france is so negative. thanks



10=2
User currently offlineSebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3681 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1230 times:

Chirac is as corrupt as they come

You have a bad definition of corruption. See the thread about French cars. Charles, you're lying one more time.



And the Iraqis have since uncovered plenty of evidence pointing to France's monetary reasons for wanting Saddam to stay in power.

LOL.
The huge benefits US companies will make in Afghanistan and Iraq with the oil are not worth speaking of ?


User currently offlineTYSGoVols From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 634 posts, RR: 16
Reply 15, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1218 times:

If oil was so much of an issue with us American's, Why are we not raping those oil fields. The Russians seemed pretty eager to remind the rest of us they had oil contracts that they still want honored. Oh by teh way the U.S. produced more oil in 2000 than did Iraq, we also have importation agreements with Mexico, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and we produce quite a bit of our own. So why then would we need Iraqi oil? With the enrite world watching to see if we abuse the Iraqi's why would we so blatently take advantage of them?

<>< Garen



Rocky Top You'll Always be home sweet home to me, Good ole' Rocky Top WOOOOO
User currently offlinePPGMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (10 years 7 months 3 days ago) and read 1202 times:

1. Half that stuff is crap! Except for the Cruise missiles!

So we have ten weapon systems. If half of them were crap then that means that 5 of them didn't do what was expected of them.

B-1B: Carrys a greater warload than the B-52, farther, and faster, with a greatly reduced radar cross section.

AH-64: Fantastic helicopter, has meet or exceeded everything that was expected of it by the US Army.

Patriot: Though it did have a glitch in the software, but when it was rebooted on scheduled (as the techs were instructed to) it worked as advertised. It worked well enough that quite a few nations have ordered the missile system also.

Aegis System: The system has worked as advertised, don't see any issues with it, though it is getting upgrades with the times.

A/V-8B: Any issues with the airframe were known before the USMC purchased the aircraft since it's nothing more than an upgrade of the Bae design. But it has done it's job well giving the USMC some independence with it's fixed wing air wing.

F-15: Meet and has exceeded the expectations of the airframe, and is filling in the roll of the retired F-111 with the F-15E.

F-14 A/D: Though the A model was underpowered, it meet the objectives of the Navy.

Phoenix: Has meet it's objectives, and still meets them, not bad for a missile that is almost 40 years old. It is only being retired because it is no longer needed. The CBG is no longer significantly threatened by long-range bombers since the down fall of the USSR.

Sparrow: Developed in 1956 and has served well it was replaced but the AMRAAM. The model that Sen. Kerry voted against got 25 victories over Iraq during Operation Desert Storm.

All of the said weapon systems have served quite well over the years, though some have been replaced by newer weapon systems. None are what I would call crap.

3. My brother said when he went to Iraq on average each guy spend (from their own pockets) between $1200 - $1500 per man to replace items from GPS units,cold/hot weather gear to flak-vest to 'cover their own asses' since they were headed for combat!

Individuals buying a GPS for themselves is not uncommon, because not every aircraft, tank, or soldier is given a unit because they don't need it. If every soldier carried every piece of equipment that they would each need an ATV to carry it all. So the army only gives the military GPS to one soldier in the platoon, the UHF radio to another, et al.

Now about flak vests, that comes into play when the Army has to weigh the costs or protection versus the bottom line. Do soldiers in the rear need the same flak jackets as the 1st Special Operations Group or the Rangers? No they don't, because their chance of coming under fire is much less than the above. It's the same in the entire military, why do you think that C-5's, and most VIP transports don't have ECM?



At worst, you screw up and die.
User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4515 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1193 times:

I support John Kerry.

User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1188 times:

If we're talking about hypocritical, wasn't the US still supporting Saddam back in 1984?

User currently offlinePhxairfan From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 811 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1185 times:

Zak: In referring to America as becoming the new France under Kerry. I am referring to the fact that France has not opposed and armed threat with any effort since World War II. If you want to point out the Indochina war, I'll point out the fact that the French lost and a little country called the United States came in and took their place. I am not trying to insult French culture but merely the weak stance on foreign affairs. There was a time when the French were not afraid to fight for what they knew was right. I understand that the French have an active role in Afghanistan, and there presence is appreciated. However the French are never the first in, and never the last to leave. They only come in when its time to mop up.

User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1178 times:

"Dude, Bush got his 87 billion to piss away in Iraq."

"(...) besides a thinner military is always better. how can anyone not support u.s. military spending cuts? they waste BILLIONS A DAY for nothing."


--

Exactly.




"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineStartvalve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1169 times:

The F-14 was screwed up from the start, no F-14 no need for the Phoenix

The B-1 was screwed up from the start as well, Carter killed it, Reagan saved it but some good it did. I think all B-1 squadrons are reserve these days and the B-1s will be rotting in the desert when the B-52 are just getting their second wind.

The Apache was designed for the forests of Europe. Read something other than propaganda, they have reliability issues in the sandbox.

Pretty stupid on the whole tomahawk thing, those are the only way Democrats know how to retaliate, using a $1million missile to blow up a $25 tent and hit a camel in the ass.

As for the new body armor, yeah the troops need it and should get it, its not our fault the last administration did not see fit to order enough of it. The company that makes the stuff is cranking it out as fast as they can but hey some of it was already in the civilian warehouses.


User currently offlinePPGMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1160 times:

The F-14 was screwed up from the start, no F-14 no need for the Phoenix

They are going to lose quite a bit of operational capability by the retirement of the F-14, but are going to save on maintenance costs over the aging F-14. The F-14D also had a much greater bomb carrying capacity than it's replacement.

The B-1 was screwed up from the start as well, Carter killed it, Reagan saved it but some good it did. I think all B-1 squadrons are reserve these days and the B-1s will be rotting in the desert when the B-52 are just getting their second wind.

Actually 3 B-1B squadrons are ACC (69 aircraft), with 2 ANG (22 aircraft). With a 2 at Edwards under AMC. The B-52 is only getting a second wind because it's cheaper due to an abundance of aircraft and spare parts, but it still is not a capable overall.

The Apache was designed for the forests of Europe. Read something other than propaganda, they have reliability issues in the sandbox.

Someone should really tell the Army, and the CENTAF. Every report I heard from the sandbox was that all the choppers did remarkably well in the Deserts. You can even see pictures of completely sand covered aircraft flying missions over there.



At worst, you screw up and die.
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1153 times:

Any helicopter is going to have reliability issues in the sandbox.

Tom Clancy in his book on carrier air wings says that the F-14Ds are the single most valuable airframe on the deck of a carrier. They have capabilities even the Super Hornet can't match.

I likewise also think that the B-1B is an extremely capable bomber. More so, even, than the B-52.


User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1148 times:

"I am referring to the fact that France has not opposed and armed threat with any effort since World War II."

is that why france had a massive nuclear arsenal and military to aid germany in case of a soviet invasion in the cold war?

"If you want to point out the Indochina war, I'll point out the fact that the French lost and a little country called the United States came in and took their place."

guess what, the little country called the united states came in and lost aswell. so gee not much of a difference there except the french had the brains to pull out before slaughtering of millions commenced

"I am not trying to insult French culture but merely the weak stance on foreign affairs. There was a time when the French were not afraid to fight for what they knew was right."

they still do, more actively then ever. examples would be the strong stance against the war on iraq, the french efforts in saving western citizens in various african countries and their peacekeeping and negotiation efforts in multiple parts of the world. "fighting" for whats right does not imply the active use of force, even though that seems to be the only way u.s. people can see it.


"I understand that the French have an active role in Afghanistan, and there presence is appreciated. However the French are never the first in, and never the last to leave."

except in those dozens of humanitarian missions in civil war torn areas that do not get much news coverage on the other side of the pond since its about people in bum f*ken africa anyway and there is no big propaganda rally around it.

"They only come in when its time to mop up."

mop up what? the ruins that american war mongering left behind due to the inability of any u.s. government of the past decades to look for solutions that do not include the active use of force but prefer the invasion on third world countries to leave behind just another mess?


it would be one of the greatest achievements by john kerry if the u.s. would indeed become the new france and focus on issues and pursue them determined but without the everpresent threat of military force instead of the *lets bomb another country that we cant find on the map" attitude employed by u.s. leaders of the past.


p.s.
that does include the holy cow of the dems billy klintoon



10=2
25 BN747 : Individuals buying a GPS for themselves is not uncommon, because not every aircraft, tank, or soldier is given a unit because they don't need it. If e
26 Post contains links Phxairfan : "is that why France had a massive nuclear arsenal and military to aid Germany in case of a soviet invasion in the cold war?" But that was just it that
27 BN747 : Actually 3 B-1B squadrons are ACC (69 aircraft), with 2 ANG (22 aircraft). With a 2 at Edwards under AMC. The B-52 is only getting a second wind becau
28 BN747 : I hope PPGMD watched Hardball w Chris Matthews tonight.....turns out Shoshanna Johnson (black female POW) who was wounded and captured along with Jess
29 Post contains images Go4EVA : I hope PPGMD watched Hardball w Chris Matthews tonight.....turns out Shoshanna Johnson (black female POW) who was wounded and captured along with Jess
30 PPGMD : And during Gulf I and Gulf II....that's exactly where most B-1s stayed...at their bases! A couple joined an armada of B-52's, which were doing the hea
31 Post contains images Go4EVA : Yes, she was a Chef, but her unit was one of the few rear element units that ever got attacked. I just meant she had potentially 2 ways of being deadl
32 Post contains images BN747 : Both of you..wrong again. The term is "COOk" ...check yesterdays USA Today article on her AND check MSNBC transcripts from yesterday's Hardball broadc
33 PPGMD : Depends on the service, the mess food on USAF bases is quite good, it's not a first class restaurant, but certainly could complete with a Denny's or s
34 Go4EVA : Lighten up, BN. A little humor won't kill you. I was just happy to hear that the little chef was able to kick some butt. Cool.
35 BN747 : PPGMD instead of guess work..I'd rather speak with someone who was there (in both Gulf conflicts). Your Lounge-Chair General comment of 'troops in th
36 Go4EVA : *sanitized for your protection* Deja vu
37 Dc10guy : Don't worry. The B-52's have relatively low time.... I'm sure they will be dropping bombs on kids for decades to come.
38 BN747 : RFLMAO...now that was a gut buster! Hilarious Dc10guy....that's totally M*A*S*H humor...simultaneously funny and sad. Hilariously delivered..but a tra
39 Go Canada! : "Remember the thrill we all had during the first Gulf War each time a Patriot missile shot down one of Saddam's Scuds? If the country had listened to
40 PPGMD : errm, the scuds did get through.The US took a success to be when it exploded near the scud, it did not stop the scuds. That's because there was an iss
41 Startvalve : How did Kerry vote on the simultaneous removal of BN747s sense of humor and the implantation of the steel rod in his butt? lighten up, its just a mess
42 BN747 : Start, here's how Kerry voted, to leave the sense of humor with me...and plant the steel rod up yours...with a spike! Twice! So who says he flipflops
43 PPGMD : you must be joking...Halliburton just got busted billing the for millions false billing of meals provided to our troops in Iraq! The 'investigation' i
44 BN747 : Democrats investigating the shit out of Republicans, and Republicans doing the same out of Democrats. One of the few areas where partisanship is actu
45 BN747 : Now comes news that Rumsfeld wants to close a slew of bases...according to him 'up 24% of current military bases are underutilized and can afford to b
46 MD-90 : I'll be those bases can be closed and the operations consolidated and save money without reducing effectiveness. It's a well known fact that Congressm
47 PPGMD : Now comes news that Rumsfeld wants to close a slew of bases...according to him 'up 24% of current military bases are underutilized and can afford to b
48 Post contains links BN747 : Uh huh ..right..and it wasn't long ago that MD90 was clamoring on about how Clinton closed bases thus 'weakening' the military. But I can really see h
49 TYSGoVols : So do police officers what's your point? < Garen
50 TYSGoVols : I ahve read some of it. I just think that if you are going to criticize why not take it all the way and attempt an argument from there. After what I h
51 Galaxy5 : PPGMD From United States, joined Sep 2001, 1624 posts, RR: 0 B-1B: Carrys a greater warload than the B-52, farther, and faster, with a greatly reduced
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Soldiers Decline Body Armor posted Mon Mar 27 2006 19:42:17 by UH60FtRucker
Bush Comment On Kerry's Mil. Service posted Sun Aug 29 2004 20:53:36 by Scottieprecord
An Adv/re Of A Polish Guy With A Bigot US Family posted Tue Nov 14 2006 15:43:24 by Rammstein
When You're Stressed, What Is Your Escape? posted Tue Nov 14 2006 13:08:34 by Itsjustme
A Question For The Anti-Bush Crowd: Re: Privacy posted Mon Nov 6 2006 00:25:44 by Matt D
John Kerry's Latest Brilliant Comments Part 2 posted Sun Nov 5 2006 22:39:57 by Diamond
John Kerry's Latest Brilliant Comments posted Tue Oct 31 2006 19:27:58 by Jcs17
If The Draft Was Re-instated... posted Fri Oct 27 2006 00:02:51 by Bushpilot
Kimi's "I Was Having A S**T" Comment posted Tue Oct 24 2006 15:50:46 by DABZF
Another Body Blow To The GOP (Tan D. Nguyen) posted Thu Oct 19 2006 23:53:28 by TedTAce