Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditLast night, John McCain went on at length about his imprisonment in Vietnamese POW camps, and indeed his time as a captive in Vietnam has been the spark to his political career since the 1970s. But both McCain -- and the video that introduced him -- glosses over an earlier event that might have shaped his approach to military affairs: the disastrous 1967 fire aboard the USS Forrestal.
Way back in 2000, I wrote a piece called McCain's Vietnam for The Nation, in which I described the significance of that event in McCain's life:
Like many potentially life-altering experiences, McCain's came as the result of a brush with death. On July 29, 1967, while preparing for his sixth bombing run over North Vietnam in his A-4 Skyhawk aboard the deck of the USS Forrestal, an accidentally fired Zuni missile ripped into his plane's fuel tank. Within moments, a chain reaction swept the deck of the carrier, triggering fires and explosions, setting off 1,000-pound bombs and engulfing planes, killing 134 men. McCain, slightly wounded, saw body parts fly and watched blistered comrades die before his eyes.A few months later, sipping Scotch in a Saigon villa with Johnny Apple of the New York Times, McCain reflected on the trauma. "It's a difficult thing to say," he said, "but now that I've seen what the bombs and the napalm did to the people on our ship, I'm not so sure that I want to drop any more of that stuff on North Vietnam." (In 1972, a significant number of B-52 pilots and crew engaged in exactly that kind of heroic insubordination, refusing orders to fly missions in the midst of President Nixon's carpet-bombing of North Vietnam.)
Certainly McCain could not have been unaware of the havoc unleashed by his bombing missions over Vietnam. Though Pentagon war planners and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara preferred to emphasize the antiseptic nature of aerial bombardment against carefully chosen targets, a highly publicized series of articles in late 1966 by Harrison Salisbury in the New York Times described the widespread devastation of civilian neighborhoods around Hanoi by American bombs. "Bomb damage...extends over an area of probably a mile or so on both sides of the highway" near one target, he wrote, noting that "small villages and hamlets along the route [were] almost obliterated." Several years ago, a chastened McNamara acknowledged that Operation Rolling Thunder, which unloaded 800 tons of bombs a day over North Vietnam, caused more than a million deaths and injuries in Vietnam each year from 1965 to 1968.
Standing stiffly in the sun outside a New Hampshire high school after a campaign appearance, McCain curtly rejects the idea that he had any second thoughts about his role in Rolling Thunder. He denies the accuracy of the quotation from 1967, stumbling briefly over his words before barking, "That wasn't the exact statement." Instead, he says, he was simply referring to the "terrible power we had" and reacting to the horror of war. And perhaps it is too much to expect McCain, born on a naval air station in the Panama Canal Zone and programmed virtually since birth for his part in the war, to have let his conscience get the better of him. In any case, within weeks of the '67 incident, McCain made the fateful decision to plunge back into combat, getting himself assigned to the carrier Oriskany, where he joined an A-4 squadron called "the Saints." On October 26, 1967, on his twenty-third bombing mission, this one against a thermal power plant in what McCain described in his book as "a heavily populated part of Hanoi," he was shot down, plunging into a lake just blocks away from Ho Chi Minh's presidential palace, and taken to prison.
"Nobody made me fly over Vietnam," McCain says now, as quoted in John McCain: An American Odyssey, the biography by Robert Timberg. "That's what I was trained to do and that's what I wanted to do.
McCain often says that he understands how hellish war is, and he said that again last night. Yet while he talks, once in a while, about the Forrestal tragedy, he never mentions his reaction to it.
PS Sorry to those who read an earlier post, which has been removed. I hit the wrong button.
Share this article
Robert Dreyfuss
A chronicle of America's adventures in foreign policy and national security.
RSS
"PS Sorry to those who read an earlier post, which has been removed. I hit the wrong button."....wrong button?
Hmmmmm?....oh well, on-topic-
McCain's conversation with Apple obviously pre-dated his Hanoi Hilton experience. So the timeline is important.
It'd be an interesting alternative history, to presuppose if McCain had NOT been shot down.
Would his reactions to the explosions on the Forrestal and what that would have looked like on North Vietnam have perhaps pushed him in a more "John Kerry" direction on the war?
In some parallel universe, where McCain became an anti-war activist and later Democratic Senator...and possible Presidential contender...did a "parallel Karl Rove" create Swift Boat ads against John McCain?
Regardless, after his POW treatment, McCain made it quite clear his views on the effect of the war on the Vietnamese, when he said he "still hated Gooks" just a few years back.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/05/2008 @ 12:42pm
"Like many potentially life-altering experiences, McCain's came as the result of a brush with death. On July 29, 1967, while preparing for his sixth bombing run over North Vietnam in his A-4 Skyhawk aboard the deck of the USS Forrestal, an accidentally fired Zuni missile ripped into his plane's fuel tank. Within moments, a chain reaction swept the deck of the carrier, triggering fires and explosions, setting off 1,000-pound bombs and engulfing planes, killing 134 men. McCain, slightly wounded, saw body parts fly and watched blistered comrades die before his eyes."
This is generous to him in not mentioning that there are many, including people on the Forrestal, who hold him personally responsible for the hell that was unleashed.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 12:53pm
MCCAIN GAFFE ON FOREIGN AID - nice political analysis. He was talking about the $700B/yr we spend on foreign oil, not foreign aid. Maybe you missed the very next lines in his speech: "We'll attack the problem on every front. We'll produce more energy at home." And he goes on to explain the ways he will produce more energy. Oh well, you're only a national political analyst, I'm sure you can't be bothered to actually pay attention to what you're criticizing when you're launching your partisan screeds.
I like how you conclude, based entirely your own misunderstanding, "That McCain could be so obviously stupid and rabble-rousing in his big speech says all you need to know about McCain's understanding of how the world works."
Your gaffe on McCain's speech leads me to conclude, "That Dreyfus could be so obviously stupd and rabble-rousing in his political analysis says all you need to know about the Nation's wacko-left politics and impossibly low standards for contributing editors."
Posted by ct4change at 09/05/2008 @ 1:02pm
Posted by ct4change at 09/05/2008 @ 1:02pm
Uhhhh. What the hell are you talking about?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 1:11pm
Is the story that McCain was hot-dogging it and started the fire on the Forrestal himself completely false?
Posted by ianej5 at 09/05/2008 @ 1:17pm
Posted by ianej5 at 09/05/2008 @ 1:17pm
I have been intrigued by the darker version of the Forrestal story for some time now. Up to this point, I have found two things to be true:
1. Nearly all the allegations I have read use the same verbiage, indicating a single source for the account.
2. No first-person accounts from fellow crew members seem to exist.
Posted by drhammer at 09/05/2008 @ 1:35pm
Is the story that McCain was hot-dogging it and started the fire on the Forrestal himself completely false? Posted by ianej5 at 09/05/2008 @ 1:17pm
No. There has been very much talk about this issue it's just no one wants to mention it because you aren't allowed to disparage the military career of McCain. There are many including people on that boat that think he is fully to blame for those deaths. The rocket would not have been launched had he not wet started his plane.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 1:56pm
<i>Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 1:56</i>
If I recall correctly from previous discussion of this, arguments that he had responsibility for the incident rather than being basically a victim of it were not even remotely persuasive. What's the basis for alleging his fault here?
Posted by Thrawn at 09/05/2008 @ 2:01pm
What's the basis for alleging his fault here? Posted by Thrawn at 09/05/2008 @ 2:01pm
In order to "hotdog", he wetstarted his plain in order to shoot flames at the plane behind him. The pilot behind him was doing start up procedures and, being startled by the flames shooting at his plane, pressed the launch button.
I know we may not consider this the start but tell that to the veterans who were on the Forrestal and DO blame McCain.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 2:16pm
Forrestal was decommissioned 11 September 1993
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/05/2008 @ 2:32pm
I am more worried about his mental status. Everyone that I know that has been to War has serious problems whether he was shot down, fell down, or was pushed down he has serious issues and everyone is tiptoe'ing around the fact he is human and is reminded everyday of the hell he went through and I don't want him near any "red" buttons period! He had 600 POW friends with him and 500 are still alive but he had only what? 6 of them there with him? This is what the other POW's are saying: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLWEDMLmjKk
Posted by psahome at 09/05/2008 @ 2:34pm
"McCain often says that he understands how hellish war is, and he said that again last night."
Then Johnny Mack needs to reconcile this for me:
How can a guy who has seen the hell of war (and in a way that few experience and fewer live to tell) make jokes about starting a new one?
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Iran...
As Spock would say, illogical.
Posted by skeletonman at 09/05/2008 @ 2:46pm
Stay tuned for the next installment about how he cheated on and left his wife after she waited for him to return from Vietnamese prison camp.
Posted by madlib at 09/05/2008 @ 2:10pm
Facts are facts, man.
And Clinton lied about a BJ.
Posted by skeletonman at 09/05/2008 @ 2:49pm
It's really pathetic to read the comment of some of the people here, most of whom would never don the uniform of the United States even in peacetime.
Thank God for people and dedicated heroes like John McCain. If it wasn't for people of his stripe, we'd all be speaking German now.
Posted by frankgrits at 09/05/2008 @ 2:50pm
I'll remind you that I did serve, Frank - 1985-1989 as a Surface Warfare Officer.
I'll further remind you that my criticisms of McCain in no way disparage his service, just his judgment.
Posted by skeletonman at 09/05/2008 @ 2:55pm
Let me put it this way, if I were a grunt on the ground in Vietnam and I saw by buddies being ripped apart by the enemy, I sure would be inspired to see our flyboys in their skyhawks dropping hell on the enemy.
Posted by frankgrits at 09/05/2008 @ 2:50pm
Hahahaha. As usual Frank missed the ENTIRE point of the article. It wasn't the enemy who was ripping them apart it was their own bombs you idiot. This wasn't McCain seeing his friends torn apart by the enemy. This was McCain seeing his friends torn apart by the very things they were dropping on the Vietnamese. Jesus you need to pick a new brain I think yours is past it's expiration date.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 2:55pm
Posted by skeletonman at 09/05/2008 @ 2:55pm
Don't worry. Frank never served. He's full of crap.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 2:57pm
Don't worry. Frank never served. He's full of crap.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 2:57pm
Oh, I know he's full of crap. He needs to be reminded that the fundamental quality required in a president - especially after the mess left by the current occupant - is judgment. That, and the ability to learn from one's mistakes. Both being qualities that McCain abjectly lacks.
Posted by skeletonman at 09/05/2008 @ 3:01pm
Mr. Dreyfuss, I noticed your Opinion piece on Yahoo called "McCain Gaffe on Foreign Aid". Unfortunately, you don't have it posted here in your blog to allow comments, so I'll just do so right here.
To put it in short terms, I was taken aback at your shoddy reporting.
You don't seem to realize that when McCain talked about the $700B USD that we are sending to people who don't like us, he wasn't even discussing foreign aid. It was in the middle of his discussion of how he plans to move the US to energy independence. He was actually talking about the money that goes to OPEC each year (at the current $/barrel rate) in exchange for oil. The US uses around 20M barrels of oil per day. Of that (and I am estimating a bit here), we probably produce no more than about 3M barrels per day domestically. If yo take the remaining balance of 17Million barrels of oil per day X 365 days, you get 6.205 M barrels of oil imports per year. Multiplying that by today's rate of about $110 per barrel, you get a total outflow of USD equaling about $683 billion, which is quite in the ballpark of the $700 Billion that McCain metnioned.
Either you were very much asleep when McCain spoke and missed exactly what he was saying in your glee to find what you thought was a gaffe, or you simply can't do math.
If you want to leave the op piece out there, that's fine, but it does more to cast doubt on your credibility than on McCain's. If your smart, a correct and or retraction of the story is in order. Even then, I'm sure if you look hard enough, you'll find something else to gaffe on.
Signed,
A concerned citizen who won't give the media a free pass, even if they choose to gaffe with an attempted eloquence.
Posted by jogetz at 09/05/2008 @ 3:02pm
Your gaffe on McCain's speech leads me to conclude, "That Dreyfus could be so obviously stupd and rabble-rousing in his political analysis says all you need to know about the Nation's wacko-left politics and impossibly low standards for contributing editors."
Posted by ct4change at 09/05/2008 @ 1:02pm
The truth about your heroes blunders during Vietnam upset you? All you want to hear is the good stuff?
OK, here goes, just to make you happy. John McCain single handedly won the Vietnam war. Faux News sources have discovered that the Vietnam war was in fact a victory, and that only the liberal communist groups in the U.S. who controlled media outlets declared the war a loss.
John McCain was awarded the seat of Senator for the state of Arizona; a state that retains the bulk of it's cash flow for defense system testing and development. John McCain does not see the need to use earmarks to get money for his state. It's built in money that is automatically awarded to the state of Arizona with no questions asked.
The heroic senator will now step forward and offer his brave service as president of the United States. He deserves the job, because, well, he killed a lot of "bad gooks" in his bombing missions. A national hero....John McCain.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:19pm
I'll remind you that I did serve, Frank - 1985-1989 as a Surface Warfare Officer.
I'll further remind you that my criticisms of McCain in no way disparage his service, just his judgment.
Posted by skeletonman at 09/05/2008 @ 2:55pm
Don't waste your time on Franky. He's long gone. Us folks who did serve in the military, but don't follow the republican philosophy, have strayed from the good side in their eyes.
A democrat who actually would defend the United States doesn't exist in their minds. Only good moralistic bible thumpers serve in our military. Did't you get the memo? Oh, that's right, you were probably operating a patient of your. Damn, elitist doctors!!! lol
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:23pm
Oh, that's right, you were probably operating a patient of your
I can't type. Meant to say patient of yours.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:24pm
FrankGrits-Maybe,you should show more respect for combat veterans then and not refer to McCain as a fascist which you would still be doing if Hillary had won..
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 3:25pm
Who in the FUCK mentioned Bill Clinton? So Bill Clinton being a philanderer makes it okay for John THE MAVERICK McCain to be one? HMMMMMMMMMMM! Posted by madlib at 09/05/2008 @ 3:26pm
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:32pm
A democrat who actually would defend the United States doesn't exist in their minds. Only good moralistic bible thumpers serve in our military. Did't you get the memo? Oh, that's right, you were probably operating a patient of your. Damn, elitist doctors!!! lol Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:23pm
It's funny. They always complain when Democrat type cast women as being pro-choice. They always say that you guys consider all women to be pro-choice and anyone who isn't you think is a sell out. They do it with black people too. They complain because they think black people consider Condoleeza Rice a sellout because she isn't a democrat. But then when it comes to the military they consider anyone who served but doesn't agree with the militaristic style they want to run things to be a miscreant and a malcontent as LVL puts it. What a bunch of moronic hypocrites. They should at least make it a little harder to point out their hypocrisy.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:37pm
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:32pm
And ironic, too.
Isn't that claptrap about BJ Clinton the kneejerk response of a cornered wingnut?
I found it amusing to see someone from that side positing that one of theirs could be the victim of such a dastardly smear.
Posted by skeletonman at 09/05/2008 @ 3:41pm
A fine line between hero and war criminal.
A fine line between family man and philanderer.
A fine line between standing up to the oil companies and working for their agenda.
A fine line between being a maverick and being a stray.
But its a wide chasm between being a maverick and being a leader!
Posted by geof01 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:41pm
If only McCain could tell the American People as much about his Vietnam experience as he shared with the Vietnamese.
Posted by geof01 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:42pm
But then when it comes to the military they consider anyone who served but doesn't agree with the militaristic style they want to run things to be a miscreant and a malcontent as LVL puts it. What a bunch of moronic hypocrites. They should at least make it a little harder to point out their hypocrisy.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:37pm
Interesting discourse.
One of the things that you will find if you have a chance to speak with someone in the military at the general staff/flag level is that by and large - though individually they may be either moderately conservative or modestly liberal - if you get to that level, it implies that you are a broad minded and thoughtful person. Very few zealots get that far (Army General Boykin being a glaring exception).
Guys like Mike Mullins, the late Mike Boorda (who I met several times as he and the skipper of my ship were on a first name basis), even Colin Powell are cut from a different cloth than officers like J. Bush McCain.
McCain may have been a magnificent tactical aviator for all I know (though losing 5 aircraft might call this into question), but he failed then to make the leap to strategic level thinking and he continues to fail at that level.
I said it earlier on a different thread:
Poorly conceived plan, brilliant execution. That's McCain in a nutshell.
Posted by skeletonman at 09/05/2008 @ 3:51pm
<i>Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 3:37pm </i>
I think that's fair, and it frustrates me too. People shouldn't assume that everyone of one gender or one race will vote the same way or see the same way on one issue, nor should they assume that everyone with military experience will have the same political viewpoints.
Interestingly, btw, I haven't heard many mention that the granddaughter of Eisenhower was one of the speakers at the Dem convention. I want to check out the speech at some point, and on a related note, check out "Why We Fight" (you may recognize a familiar face!). It's a fascinating and disturbing documentary. I will admit being a little disturbed tbat virtually no one in either party, despite Eisenhower's warning, said a peep about the military-industrial complex. It IS a real problem and should be treated as such.
Here's my bottom line: I want to hear both sides talk more about things like the military-industrial complex, I want to hear the Democrats talk more about social questions, and I want the Republicans to talk more about issues like poverty. Hearing Democrats swear they'll "be diplomatic but strong" isn't good enough, and hearing Republicans ask "but isn't opportunity nice?" isn't good enough.
Lastly, I heard floating around something I think would be a fantastic idea. Have McCain and Obama travel around the country together (yes, together) and debate. Reaffirm that there are real differences to be debated, but that we really aren't enemies. And finally (wow this starting to sound like a speech or something), country should never, ever trump humanity and the good. Period.
Posted by Thrawn at 09/05/2008 @ 3:58pm
Guys like Mike Mullins, the late Mike Boorda (who I met several times as he and the skipper of my ship were on a first name basis), even Colin Powell are cut from a different cloth than officers like J. Bush McCain.
Posted by skeletonman at 09/05/2008 @ 3:51pm |
It's very true. Colin Powell is widely lawded by bother Democrats and Republicans. He is well liked accross the board because he is very broad minded. I never thought about that phenoma but it's very true. I mean Bush was having a problem with retired generals who were well respected coming out against his war so now that you point it out it's very interesting. Even the commander of the Iraqi front was against the war in the end.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:22pm
Even the commander of the Iraqi front was against the war in the end.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:22pm
Any commander worth a grain of salt would want to know to exactly what it is his troops are supposed to accomplish. A mission is not merely that we must achieve victory, but rather, how to go about achieving it and further defining exactly what "mission accomplished" means. After the initial attacks on Iraq had subsided, there was no mission other than the occupying police force.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:29pm
Lastly, I heard floating around something I think would be a fantastic idea. Have McCain and Obama travel around the country together (yes, together) and debate. Reaffirm that there are real differences to be debated, but that we really aren't enemies. And finally (wow this starting to sound like a speech or something), country should never, ever trump humanity and the good. Period. Posted by Thrawn at 09/05/2008 @ 3:58pm
I can't agree with you more. There is a very big mentality of us versus them. Many Republicans and Democrats view each other as enemies. I mean I have heard Jom refer to Demo's as an enemy and threat to the country. What most people don't realize is that 80% of this country don't think like them. 10% hard right, 10% hard left those are the enemies and those are the people you tend to get on these boards. I don't view Republicans as an enemy I view them as a balance.
Without both Republicans AND Democrats this country would be in ruin. I would love to see a 50 state debate with both McCain and Obama traveling together. Hell maybe even sharing a bus or hotel room. That would be interesting. This country isn't as divided as the extremes would like us to think. Most of this country is pretty moderate pulling from both sides of the aisle on issues. Happy and Jom say they would like to secede from the country but I think most of America is very content being the way it is. I think the reason income tax hasn't gone away, the reason social Security still exists, the reason abortion hasn't been overturned is because that is what MOST of the country wants.
Only a small fringe group wants anarchy or sales tax only or save the trees and screw humanity.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:30pm
Any commander worth a grain of salt would want to know to exactly what it is his troops are supposed to accomplish. A mission is not merely that we must achieve victory, but rather, how to go about achieving it and further defining exactly what "mission accomplished" means. After the initial attacks on Iraq had subsided, there was no mission other than the occupying police force. Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:29pm
I think Iraq was one of the most poorly conceived and executed plans EVER. This was essentially one of the worst planned wars ever. We went in there with no real mission, no plan, nothing. Our troops were told to shock and awe and thats about it. I don't know how a commander would avoid becoming incredibly frustrated seeing his men dying in a situation that has no plan. I think undeniably the surge worked but I think we are lucky it worked. The situation could have EASILY swung the other way and I think it is still only a band-aid. I think there is no victory in Iraq. Iraq be done when Iraqis take responsibility for their government and I think that is much of the frustration from commanders is that their men are still dying and no one is taking responsibility of running their own country.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:35pm
I'm not used to talking to sensible people on this website. I'm too used to talking to the far left or the far right. It's quite refreshing talking to Skel, Wolf and Thrawn.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:39pm
Well, if that's the truth, that's fine but please understand that I'm not questiong your service if you did indeed serve, just as I wouldn't want anyone questioning mine. I just don't get it when someone who has served can't respect someone else's heroism just because of politics. Posted by frankgrits at 09/05/2008 @ 4:38pm
Frank never served.
"just as I wouldn't want anyone questioning mine."
He has admitted that he didn't serve.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:39pm
FrankGrits-You did not recognize McCain's heroism until Hillary lost so you can stop your juvenile hypocrisy at any time.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 4:41pm
Lastly, I heard floating around something I think would be a fantastic idea. Have McCain and Obama travel around the country together (yes, together) and debate. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:30pm
I think that debates are a great idea. However, for the debates that we have in store for us, there should be some new rules. 1) No outside sources for information during the debates. If you recall, Bush had a wire on during the debates and was being fed what to say. It was pretty obvious by some of the delays in his answers.
2) No softball questions to make either candidate look good. Ask them pressing questions especially where they've gone back on something they said earlier. I'd love to hear McCain explain all by himself why he's now all of a sudden anti abortion at all costs. Why, Mav Boy used to feel that the tax cuts to the wealthy were a bad thing, but now they're a good thing. How about why he's voted against care for veterans. Why does he think drilling for oil is more important than education. Obama could handle those questions pretty readily, McIdiot would and will be stumbling all over himself.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:41pm
Lastly, I heard floating around something I think would be a fantastic idea. Have McCain and Obama travel around the country together (yes, together) and debate. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:30pm
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:41pm
I would also like to hear Obama explain why he shifted to the right on a few positions as soon as he won the nomimation, or as soon as it was obvious he was going to win the nomination. He immediately started catering to AIPAC as did McCain. Both candidates seem to be more worried about a handful of Israel lobbyists than they are about what Americans think. This crap has to stop.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:48pm
Also just because he makes a joke once in awile, shows humor and he never jokes about the troops.
Posted by frankgrits at 09/05/2008 @ 4:45pm
Ya Frank. Bombing Iran was a real laugher.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:50pm
FrankGrirs-You've shared tons of personal information on here except for the thing about your service.You live in New England,are a Yankees fan,had a kid in the army who was in Iraq,etc.The coward is the one who ignores people who know that they lie.That would be you.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 4:50pm
FrankNoGrits-Dial 1-800-cry-baby and whine to them about Hillary, because you are getting old.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 4:54pm
FrankNoGrits-It's good that you never served because one could not trust you in combat to cover anyone's back.Someone as prone to childish tantrums as you are simply could not be trusted.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 4:57pm
don't come here and hide behind anonymous blogs and critisize those who did and suffered and sacrificed as greatly as John McCain did.
Posted by frankgrits at 09/05/2008 @ 4:48pm
What about the people who suffered more than John McCain Frank? You know, the people who came back missing limbs, scarred for life physically and/or emotionally? What about the people who never made it back Frank? Do they count too?
McCain served in the military and is no more of a hero than anyone who served. Respect his service if you must, but that has nothing to do with his ability to lead this nation. Intellect, being able to think on the spot, being able to appoint talented people to the right posts, and having a cool demeanor are more important than a bunch of flag waving bullshit Frank.
Serving in the military is kind of an honor where you can do something for your country....it sure as hell isn't about the pay. But, after serving in the military, it doesn't mean your country owes you a public office or a seat as president. The people of this nation deserve the best person we can elect into that position. Obama has proven he has more intelligence for the position and is a much cooler customer under fire. How many times have we seen McCain lose his temper or just say that he couldn't answer the question and would get back to the questioner. This is not a man who can think on his feet.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 4:58pm
Posted by frankgrits at 09/05/2008 @ 4:52pm
You're an idiot wrapped in a moron Frank. How much do you make per post pushing McCain?
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 5:00pm
Happy-You are reading something into the posts that doesn't exist,but I'm not surprised.You kids are playing the you can't criticize my side because we have a former POW and a woman.Childish.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 5:01pm
I'm parachuting out of this sick pit!
Posted by 2HAPPY at 09/05/2008 @ 4:55pm
Bon Voyage.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 5:03pm
FrankNoGrits-Why did you,on numerous occasions,refer to McCain as fascist if you think that veterans should be treated nicer and why have you called people on here that you know are combat veterans names?
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 5:04pm
FrankNoGrits-You aren't going to back off until you grow up and stop having a tantrum over Hillary losing.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 5:05pm
FrankNoGrits-You and Happy are the only two whiners on here.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 5:06pm
How does FrankGrits know what we're saying if he has all of us on ignore,as he claims?
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 5:07pm
It's an unwritten code in military circles. Talk to some of the people who resided at the Hanoi Hilton with McCain and then come back here and apologize.
Posted by frankgrits at 09/05/2008 @ 4:58pm
Frank, as usual you are full of shit. There are guys who served in the Hanoi Hilton who have come out publicly and denounced McCain saying that he's gone against everything he originally stood for. So, who's lying. McCain, your hero? Or, the other Hanoi Hilton vets who differ with your opinion?
Secondly, I did serve in the USAF 1984 to 1988. My dedication to my service was every bit as much as McCains. The enemy then was the Soviet Union and we were in middle of the "cold war". Mostly intelligence gathering and huge profits being made for defense contractors building our intercontinental ballistic missile system to the nth degree. Don't question my service dickhead. I'm not serving through my son...I wouldn't ask my kids to go to Iraq and die for W's war. I'd try to keep them away from a stupid horrible mistake, not help propogate it further.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 5:09pm
He keeps making the same claim just because I choose not to reveal details about my personal life on the internet, reasons for which are my business
Posted by frankgrits at 09/05/2008 @ 4:58pm
Mask can you find me the quote from a couple of days ago when Frank SAID point blank that he did not serve. He's a damn liar and now he is caught for it big time.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 6:58pm
FrankGrirs-You've shared tons of personal information on here except for the thing about your service.You live in New England,are a Yankees fan,had a kid in the army who was in Iraq,etc.The coward is the one who ignores people who know that they lie.That would be you. Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 4:50pm
He has actually SAID in the past few days in response to Happy they he did not serve.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 7:05pm
You will have to take my word on it that Frank admittedly said a few days ago that he never served. He admitted it when happy commented about it now he is trying to flat out lie about it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 7:11pm
Ccc-The only people who would be evasive when asked if they served would,either,be someone who did not serve,was ashamed because they served,or who was discharged with a less than an honorable discharge.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/05/2008 @ 7:16pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 6:58pm
I can try but FROSTY is the real expert.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/05/2008 @ 8:42pm
Ok, I have to speak up now.
I'm a 20 year veteran, 73-93. I voluteered duing a time when the draft still existed and most people were running to Canada. I joined to see for myself what was going on over there. I saw. Veterans who have honor will never mention what they had to sacrafice or what they did to defend your freedoms. Becasue when they do that it is only for personal gain and when you do that you cheapen the sacrafice and change it to something else, something sick and twisted. McCain make me sick, he's trumpeted his sacrafice so often that he couldn't get a refund on it at Walmart. This rich boy who went back to pappas money after the war deserves nothing. Certainly no respect, he spent that already the first 500 times he told us the POW story.
Posted by arels at 09/05/2008 @ 9:34pm
Mask can you find me the quote from a couple of days ago when Frank SAID point blank that he did not serve.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 6:58pm
He said he did not serve in combat.
Posted by Benchrest at 09/05/2008 @ 10:54pm
Older than you? Uh, no. No draft. I choose not to talk about my personal life on the web, at least not in detail. I will tell you this, I never served in combat. I have a 24 year old son who did. You do the math.
Posted by frankgrits at 09/01/2008 @ 6:10pm
Posted by Benchrest at 09/05/2008 @ 10:57pm
Posted by Benchrest at 09/05/2008 @ 10:54pm
Actually I think you're right.
Plus, there are so many more important FRANK contradictions out there....
my fave has always been where he agreed with Rush that McCain might be mentally unstable!
LOL
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/05/2008 @ 10:58pm
I think you misread me. I said I never served in COMBAT.
Posted by frankgrits at 09/01/2008 @ 7:02pm
Posted by Benchrest at 09/05/2008 @ 10:59pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/05/2008 @ 10:58pm
Well, that explains his change of heart.
Birds of a feather....
Posted by Benchrest at 09/05/2008 @ 11:03pm
You will have to take my word on it that Frank admittedly said a few days ago that he never served. He admitted it when happy commented about it now he is trying to flat out lie about it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/05/2008 @ 7:11pm
Cccomfo1,
Calm yourself. You don't have to prove Frank is full of crap. He does that on a regular basis all by himself.
What kills me about good ole Frank Burns here is that he trashes veterans for questioning McCain. I personally know three veterans, my two brothers and myself who think McCain would be a horror as president. One brother did 6 years in the military and the other did 26. So, as a family, I think we did our debt to country as far as active duty military service. I can also tell you that a good majority of those I served with were not big Reagan fans. Most of the people in the military are not rich, nor do they share the lust for power and wealth. They do what they are ordered to do and sometimes the orders they receive are crap. They are doing their job, but the higher ups hold the responsibility for effing up all the way to the White House.
We don't need another idiot like Bush calling the shots and causing death and destruction in his wake like a friggin hurrican or tornado.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 11:23pm
"served" and "hero" are nothing but stupid buzz words, stop succumbing to the stupidity.
Posted by madlib at 09/05/2008 @ 8:03pm
These days, I actually refer to it as doing time. NO offense to the U.S., just it's crappy leadership.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 11:25pm
I'm a 20 year veteran, 73-93. I voluteered duing a time when the draft still existed and most people were running to Canada. I joined to see for myself what was going on over there. I saw. Veterans who have honor will never mention what they had to sacrafice or what they did to defend your freedoms. Becasue when they do that it is only for personal gain and when you do that you cheapen the sacrafice and change it to something else, something sick and twisted. McCain make me sick, he's trumpeted his sacrafice so often that he couldn't get a refund on it at Walmart. This rich boy who went back to pappas money after the war deserves nothing. Certainly no respect, he spent that already the first 500 times he told us the POW story.
Posted by arels at 09/05/2008 @ 9:34pm
Frank, read above. Another veteran who thinks McCain and you are full of shit.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 11:27pm
I think you misread me. I said I never served in COMBAT.
Posted by frankgrits at 09/01/2008 @ 7:02pm
Posted by Benchrest at 09/05/2008 @ 10:59pm
Frank is wrong again. He's combating reason every day. That boy is a veteran of the losing side of the stupidity war if there ever was one.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 11:30pm
At least McCain spoke truth about his experiences and the necessity of fighting wars no one really wants but we must prevail in for national and world survival. But, we can never expect the leftist of America to get it!
Posted by RedRiver_. at 09/05/2008 @ 10:59pm
Go ahead and tell all of us why it was necessary to fight in Korea and Vietnam. While you are at it, tell us how that made us folks free back here in the U.S.
See, that's the catch. When I served overseas, I noticed the locals hated us U.S. forces. We didn't do anything wrong, but the fact that we were in their country, with arms, driving around on their roads, seemed to piss them off. How would you like it if the Greek Army was patroling you town Red? Would you think that they were just noble and all good fellas? NOT
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 11:33pm
" They do what they are ordered to do and sometimes the orders they receive are crap. They are doing their job, but the higher ups hold the responsibility for effing up all the way to the White House."
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/05/2008 @ 11:23pm
R.E.M.F.s
Posted by Benchrest at 09/05/2008 @ 11:42pm
redriver-My dad was in Nam when Ike was POTUS.I was in Nam when Nixon was POTUS.Both are republicans.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/06/2008 @ 12:27am
Way to ignore the first paragraph dude! Truth bites hard doesn't it?
Posted by RedRiver_. at 09/06/2008 @ 12:14am
How did I ignore the first paragraph? I said that the idiots in Washington dictate where the mostly enlisted poor type folk soldiers go.
W sent these guys to Iraq. What the hell are you talking about?
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/06/2008 @ 12:31am
redriver-My dad was in Nam when Ike was POTUS.I was in Nam when Nixon was POTUS.Both are republicans.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/06/2008 @ 12:27am
There's a good book called The Great American Hypcocrits written by Glenn Greenwald. It points out all of the phony GOP heroes, armchair warriors, cowards and flat out B.S. they've pulled over the years trying to look like they are the "tough" party when in fact they are run by a bunch of cowardly chair bourne rangers. Tough talk is what they are made of with zero substance to back it up.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/06/2008 @ 12:48am
There were almost 800 American POWs in Vietnam with approx 700 of them returning home, and many are still alive.
Why aren't these former Vietnam POWs all out on the campaign trail with McCain?
Were are all of the McCain supporters who survived the USS Forrestal "accident"?
Let's hear from them. Wonder why McCain has not brought these survivors aboard him campaign?
Posted by Samms at 09/06/2008 @ 01:00am
Posted by RedRiver_. at 09/06/2008 @ 12:57am
Okay, now that you want to talk about presidents and wars. Lets see, WWII the president was FDR. The Korean War started with Truman and ended with Ike ( a republican back then but guys like you would tar and feather him now for his positions) Vietnam...Nixon, first Persian Gulf War Bush Senior who by the way thought it was a good idea to "cut and run" before we got caught in a "quagmire" to use Cheney's words. Then we have W's war.
Once again, the wars speak for themselves and what we the people of the United States got out of them. Mostly we got a lot of body bags, funeral services and nothing else in return. However, the international business world is booming I hear. YIPPEE!!!! God bless America.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/06/2008 @ 01:04am
Posted by Thrawn at 09/05/2008 @ 3:58pm
issues shall be debated after the election!
let the circus continue......
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2008 @ 01:22am
Posted by RedRiver_. at 09/06/2008 @ 01:10am
Red, You are oblivious to facts. Ike Eisenhower would be considered an outright liberal democrat nowadays. Did you know that federal highway system in the United States is called the Eisenhower Highway System? So, Ike used federal money to build federal highways instead of privatizing the venture. What a communist liberal that bastard was.
Then, Ike, the decorated WWII five star general, who pretty much won the election due to his military service warned the American people against the "military industrial complex" taking over the country. Sounds like Ike and JFK had a hell of a lot more in common than with the likes of you.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/06/2008 @ 01:22am
I can try but FROSTY is the real expert.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/05/2008 @ 8:42pm
love them tubes......
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2008 @ 01:32am
Then, Ike, the decorated WWII five star general, who pretty much won the election due to his military service warned the American people against the "military industrial complex" taking over the country. Sounds like Ike and JFK had a hell of a lot more in common than with the likes of you.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/06/2008 @ 01:22am
One more thing. The military industrial complex Ike warned about is the same war machine you rethugs now support to the hilt throwing billions of dollars at instead of taking care of infrastructure, schools, children, senior citizens, handicapped people, etc. But, by all means, throw as much money as possible to the pentagon dipshits.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/06/2008 @ 01:33am
You can't get comedy like this anywhere else except Huff and Kos!
Posted by RedRiver_. at 09/06/2008 @ 01:33am
No, by your own right wing propaganda talking points from Faux Commedy hour and the AM radio networks, Ike would be a bleeding heart liberal for using federal funds to build highways instead of privatizing it. Tell me I'm wrong. When's the last time the GOP ever wanted to use federal funds for anything other than the military, oil companies or private nuclear power plants?
In your minds, the federal government exist only to line the pockets of big business so that big business can decide how much they wish to "trickle down" to us dogs reaching for scraps at the table. Your problem is that you don't know that you are also one of the dogs getting the scraps with the ever popular Reaganomics.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/06/2008 @ 01:45am
As for government, it can stay and play in washington, the east, and leftist coasts and out of our lives!
Posted by RedRiver_. at 09/06/2008 @ 02:04am
Red, Don't you realize that the GOP is the party invading Americans' lives? Who is tapping peoples' phones? Which party feels the need to tell women whether or not they can have abortions? Which party is trying to shove religion down people's throats. Which party takes your tax dollars and throws them at middle east countries like it's toilet paper? Look at the Georgia situation. W just decided that we would give them one billion dollars? WHy? Georgia has an arrogant jackass who decided to make a run on people within his own country. Problem is that he killed a few Russian troops in the process. Now the U.S. is supposed to come to his defense? In reality, it's not about him or even defending Georgia, it's about selling the much pushed missile / radar system that W has been promoting on behalf of the defense industry for the last 2 or 3 years. Problem is, that this system doesn't defend the U.S. from anything. It's defending the Europeans. Why in the hell are we paying for it? Ever crossed your mind?
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/06/2008 @ 02:19am
I think those who have posted about the ongoing threat from a military-industrial complex are absolutely right. We need to take a long, hard look at this kind of "unholy alliance" when we consider military action (btw, the "familiar face" on the documentary criticizing this complex is...wait for it...McCain); I hope that when the campaigning is over, he would take concerns such as these seriously.
I want to also deal with some unfair strawmen (and I think Ccomf alludes to this tendency elsewhere). Does being a Democrat mean that you want to just take other people's money and spend it how you think would be best? No. Does being a Republican mean that you're either greedy or fanatical? Not at all. What really divides the parties (when they actually dig down into their roots instead of "letting Washington change them") is their philosophy as to what government should be and do. There are extremely reasonable disagreements to be had there, and I was extremely pleased to see both Biden and McCain talk about their disagreements firmly, but with great respect and friendship towards one another.
Why don't we do two things? One, stop assuming that people of the other party are crazy/malicious. It's almost always untrue and unfair. Two, replace the exchange of cute slogans and hasty accusations with actual substantial analysis. It's not wholly missing from dialogue (I've seen it from posters here both right and left), but it's too much of a minority trend. Until we recognize that we're best served as fallible and limited human beings by engaging the legitimate perspectives of each other, something vital will be missing from our politics. How can we remain one community in any meaningful way if we treat our politics like war and our political opponents like mortal enemies?
Posted by Thrawn at 09/06/2008 @ 03:10am
Quaint the way the Anti-war Anti-America crowd...
Posted by RedRiver_. at 09/05/2008 @ 10:59pm
Anti war does not equal anti American, dimwit.
Posted by skeletonman at 09/06/2008 @ 06:09am
As for government, it can stay and play in washington, the east, and leftist coasts and out of our lives!----Posted by RedRiver_. at 09/06/2008 @ 02:04am
Does RIO/RED drive on the Interstate?...maintained by Federal funding?
Does he eat food....inspected by the US Dept. of Agriculture?
Does he take pharmaceuticals....approved by the US Food & Drug Administration?
Does he ride on airlners?....regulated by the FEDERAL Aviation Administration and secured by the TSA?
Will he refuse his Social Security check...on principle?
Will he refuse his Medicare...on principle?
If the above are answered "yes"...shouldn't we be a BIT dubious of his "Keep the Gov'mint back in Washington and away from me!"????
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/06/2008 @ 08:40am
I think the point of the article is that McCain said something a little unusual for a currently serving person. Some pointed out that the usual thing is (as Patton said in the movie) to see your best friend's face turned to goo and then to immediately understand what you must do to the enemy - kill him.
But here we have a quote which doesn't go along with that pattern. Was it actually reported before McCain went to prison? Might it have been read by him while he was still doing Rolling Thunder? If it was, what did he say about it. If it wasn't, did he nurse some hesitation about dropping bombs on Hanoi, some unusual and not exactly clone-like reactions? Was he not "in character" (actorlike) for the son and grandson of admirals?
And now for the kicker. We know how war narratives must only read a certain way. They must all be about heroism. There is nothing else up there in the sky. Did he crash his plane because enemy fire was capable of shooting it down? Or did he crash for some other reason? I think this is the implication.
Had Jane Fonda been to Hanoi yet?
Posted by musings at 09/06/2008 @ 08:41am
Posted by Thrawn at 09/06/2008 @ 03:10am
The military industrial complex is something that has been warned about since the beginning of this country. It is dangerous to have a government who are controlled by those who profit from the waging of war. It just leads to endless warfare which is what we have been seeing. When was the last period in this country when you can remember us not fighting SOMEONE.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/06/2008 @ 10:36am
Posted by Benchrest at 09/05/2008 @ 10:57pm
Thanks for posting that Benchrest.
"Thanks for clarifying that. As I've said before, some people here have a reading comprehension problem. They're stuck on stupid. Posted by frankgrits at 09/06/2008 @ 09:53am
Funny that this is his response considering he has lied his ass off repeatedly and tried to this time.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/06/2008 @ 10:38am
Happy-Being pro whatever war a POTUS starts is anti America as is your view of anti war people.Reality is that it is the modern right that is anti everything that America stands for.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/06/2008 @ 1:05pm
I think it's video games! Just take a look at the titles of the hottest games over the past 10~15 years. Mind you, I am not talking about older folks....the `shrills' & `thrills' are fair descriptions of the Chris Matthews' generation! Posted by 2HAPPY at 09/06/2008 @ 12:32pm
I believe I have seen you refer to Dem's as the "the enemy." I could be wrong but who knows.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/06/2008 @ 1:06pm
Posted by 2HAPPY at 09/06/2008 @ 12:39pm
Wouldn't that mean during peace being pro-War is anti-American because you want to pick fights with people and risk getting our country destroyed?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/06/2008 @ 1:06pm
redriver-I see that you are disrespecting my dad's time in Nam and showed your ignorance as to what people,like him,were doing there.You,also,showed your ignorance about the SEATO treaty.Please,do not disrespect someone,like my dad,who risked his life in two wars for this country.Thank you.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/06/2008 @ 1:09pm
redriver-My granpa was in WW1.Please,do not,again,disrespect someone who fought for this country unless you have done the same.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/06/2008 @ 1:11pm
Posted by Thrawn at 09/06/2008 @ 03:10am
The mindset is referred to as "Manichean".
It's good vs. evil. The light vs. the dark. Black and white.
Once conditioned to think in this frame, we no longer have need of reason or nuance, or even fact. We get to the point where our strength is derived solely from the echo chamber. Ring the bell. It's red meat time.
Thanks for the thoughtful post.
Posted by drhammer at 09/06/2008 @ 1:59pm
Posted by Thrawn at 09/06/2008 @ 03:10am
The mindset is referred to as "Manichean".
It's good vs. evil. The light vs. the dark. Black and white.
Once conditioned to think in this frame, we no longer have need of reason or nuance, or even fact. We get to the point where our strength is derived solely from the echo chamber. Ring the bell. It's red meat time.
Thanks for the thoughtful post.
Posted by drhammer at 09/06/2008 @ 2:00pm
I was an infantryman with the 4th Inf Div in the Central Highlands of RVN from 1/69 to 2/70. I have a CIB, 3 bronze starts and 2 purple hearts.
I wouldn't toss around words like 'hero' about human beings as it has no meaning and is a product of the refinement of propaganda during the 20th century, the most murderous and barbaric century of world's history.
Has McCain's courage as a jet pilot or as a POW been demonstrated? It may be true, but I haven't seen any verified examples of that notion, at all. McCain was the classic 'jet jockey' who had no clue what war looked like or what his bombs did to people on the ground [civilian, innocent, enemies or water buffalo] although he may have gotten a glimpse of it during the USS Forrestal tragedy at which he was the center, click here and here and here [a more detailed description of McCain's role in the calamity]. There were numerous allegations made against McCain: that he caused the Forrestal fire that killed about 140 sailors, and seriously wounded about 160; allegations that he was gunning his jet engines or 'wet-starting' (which is jet jockey jargon for 'hot-rodding' or 'showing off') on the flight deck, which caused one of his missiles to "cook off" and fire right into the flight deck jam packed with jets ready to take off on combat missions over Vietnam. I personally was a good friend of a decorated sailor who was on the flight deck that day on the Forrestal. His name was Frank West and he told me about it in 1974, long before I had ever heard of McCain. He named McCain as the 'stupid bastard' who caused the tragedy. McCain was the only uninjured member of the entire crew to be airlifted off the Forrestal [all the others were wounded or dying]. Why? Some crew members thought it was because of his dad, [cont'd]
Posted by adin at 09/06/2008 @ 8:05pm
[con't pt.2] It comes down to this: McCain's uncorroborated word. If true, that was an act of courage. But I tell you this: it is entirely out of character of McCain either before or after Vietnam. He has always been very self-centered and ethically shaky his entire life, whether at the Naval Academy, in the Navy, his marriages, his Senate career. All the available documentation regarding his POW years indicates nothing about an early release that was offered by the North Vietnamese or refused by McCain.
Col. George Day, McCain's cellmate for the time McCain was not in solitary confinement [2 years] never mentioned McCain's refusal to be released early. He said he didn't know about it until after he and all the other POWs were released. Col. Day, John Stockdale, and several other Americans imprisoned at Hanoi were awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, yet McCain was not. Why? I don't know, but he was not even recommended for the award.
Unfortunately 'hero' has become part of our everyday 'toss off' vocabulary, e.g., our 'heroic soldiers in Iraq, Afghanistan,' McCain 'a genuine American hero', etc.
Forget Apple's interview. On July 30 Bernard Weinraub, the NY Times, interviewed an unhurt McCain in Saigon, about 12 hours after the first explosions [NYT, 30 July1967, "Start of Tragedy: Pilot Hears a Blast As He Checks Plane"].
Dreyfuss has it wrong, in my opinion. In the end, it doesn't really matter. It's all over now.
Posted by adin at 09/06/2008 @ 8:56pm
[cont'd; dang, I messed up. this is part 2, not 3.]Admiral McCain, but most, including Frank West, thought it was because sailors believed it was McCain's dangerous stunt that set the whole thing off, and he was airlifted off because of threats on his life. It is interesting to note that McCain was the only person on the flight deck who received no decoration for valor for the events that took place on that day [he was gone the next 3 days while the fires still burned, the ship came within minutes of being abandoned 4 times, and more men died].
POW McCain. Getting shot down in a fighter jet is not an example of courage; it's either bad luck, an error of the pilot, or running into a more skilled fighter pilot. It has never been clear whether he was shot down by a ground to air missile or air to air [a North Vietnamese jet fighter]. Or as McCain once said, "It doesn't take a lot of talent to get shot down." What are we left with? Being a prisoner of the North Vietnamese, being beaten, starved and tortured on and off for 5 years. That's not courage, that's a bad consequence of being taken prisoner. If that's courage then all the prisoners at Guantanamo are courageous. Except they've been there 6 years.
Now what's left? The offer of the North Vietnamese to let McCain go before any other prisoner of war because his father was an admiral. McCain has been the only person to state this. His father, the US Navy, the Red Cross, his fellow POWs -- no one heard about or can confirm this except McCain. John Hubbell, who wrote a book about American POWs in Vietnam, first published the account of McCain's POW experience after an interview with John McCain.
Posted by adin at 09/06/2008 @ 9:18pm
Posted by adin at 09/06/2008 @ 8:05pm
Adin, could you provide non-html linkage to the accounts you mentioned?
Posted by drhammer at 09/06/2008 @ 11:31pm
Iam sure the 1000 lb napalm bomb,were smarts bomb.But I readed McCain wanted 1000lb instead of 500lb which was what the plane was design for.No wonder he's NUTS.
Posted by legion at 09/07/2008 @ 08:11am
Being a prisoner of War is a Tragedy. Heroic I think not,unless you have some pull.Prisoner don't win wars unless they try to escape,make it tough on the enemy. So enough of the prisoner crap.The heros Died in vietnam.I saw the wet start on the history channel about five year ago.Different this time,been shorten and edit for public consumption.
Posted by legion at 09/07/2008 @ 08:28am
"If you hammer your guns into plows, you'll plow for those who do not."
As icky as the military is.....you'll always need one.
Posted by bleedingheart at 09/07/2008 @ 10:20am
I agree with the author that McCain is "from birth, programmed for war". He fools nobody when he talks about the horrors of war.
It is so indicative that when the explosions are in your own ship and kill your friends and comrades, then it is a tragedy. When it kills someone you cannot see and regard as "a thing", well it is OK to bomb them. And when your are a POW, it is a big tragedy but still they don't shoot at you and so you must regard your captors as members of the human race.
On the root of this, McCain believes in the blunt use of force to support America's abuse of power. This contrasts so much with Obama's take of living in a community of nations and using America's power only in concerted efforts of the world community to build a better world.
For one, America is the cop; for the other a leader. For one war is inevitable, for the other unnecesary unless it is unavoidable. For one war with all its horrors leads him to the extreme orgasm of "winning"; for the other, war experiences do not lead either party to such thing as winning.
Posted by Frank42 at 09/07/2008 @ 2:41pm
On July 29, 1967, while preparing for his sixth bombing run over North Vietnam in his A-4 Skyhawk aboard the deck of the USS Forrestal, an accidentally fired Zuni missile ripped into his plane's fuel tank. Within moments, a chain reaction swept the deck of the carrier, triggering fires and explosions, setting off 1,000-pound bombs---------
When they went through the PLAT tape they saw the Zuni accidentally fire from a Phantom into McCain's A-4. The real kicker in this accident, they were using pre WW-2 bombs. Modern munitions can handle at least 10 minutes of fire before exploding. These old munitions pulled out of an old warehouse were required because the Pentagon had run out of aerial bombs. The weapons officer aboard the ship almost didn't accept the freaking bombs. As these bombs aged they also increased their yield.
This was the first war cruise for the Forrestal and they weren't ready for prime time either. You never arm weapons when aimed at other armed aircraft.
The US Navy was also at fault for faulty wiring in the Zuni system and not heeding lessons learned from the Oriskany fire.
There is a book out on this event and the name eludes me now. There is also a report available from the US Navy on the accident.
Very interesting are the pilots that stayed in their aircraft vice ejecting. They didn't have zero/zero seats but it sure would had beaten being BBQed to death.
This was a classic accident in the unfolding events.
T11
Posted by T11 at 09/07/2008 @ 3:18pm
Posted by adin at 09/06/2008 @ 9:18pm | ignore this person | warn this person
once more, it was not a fighter jet McCain was piloting. NOT A FIGHTER JET.
Eisenhower by the way was prevailed upon to run by both parties. he could just as easily have run as a dem.
Posted by emile duBois at 09/07/2008 @ 9:41pm
Here's a little tibit of information for you folks who buy into W's following the generals in charge and listening to those who are directly involved. This includes the "surge". It was all a bunch of bullshit. I had to break up the site because it was too long. I put a space in after popup/?
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/? rn=3906861&cl=9609625&ch=4227541&src=news
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/07/2008 @ 10:01pm
When was the last period in this country when you can remember us not fighting SOMEONE.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/06/2008 @ 10:36am
Good question. Good luck finding a time period.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/07/2008 @ 10:07pm
Mind you, I am not talking about older folks....the `shrills' & `thrills' are fair descriptions of the Chris Matthews' generation!
Posted by 2HAPPY at 09/06/2008 @ 12:32pm
Karl Rove is the divide and conquer jackass behind Bush's 2000 and 2004 divisional politics. It's your party that has to divide the nation to win by playing middle income people against each other on stupid issues like prayer in school, flag burning, saluting the president as he's on television with or palms outward etc.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/07/2008 @ 10:16pm
Happy-Being pro whatever war a POTUS starts is anti America as is your view of anti war people.Reality is that it is the modern right that is anti everything that America stands for.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/06/2008 @ 1:05pm
Yep. You can divide the rethugs into two groups. The rich ones who don't want to pay taxes.... and I suspect Happy is of that ilk.
Then there's the plain idiots who were and are brainwashed into this rah rah crap and can't think for themselves. That's about 96% of the other idiots voting that way.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/07/2008 @ 10:19pm
For one, America is the cop; for the other a leader. For one war is inevitable, for the other unnecesary unless it is unavoidable. For one war with all its horrors leads him to the extreme orgasm of "winning"; for the other, war experiences do not lead either party to such thing as winning.
Posted by Frank42 at 09/07/2008 @ 2:41pm
Frank, Evidently, if you want orgasms, go watch a John Wayne flick. The good side always wins and the bad commies get caught cheating and shot behind the huts.
Real wars don't work out that way. The guys who fight them come back effed up, all of the families of those who fight them are effed up and suffer greatly.
This isn't a movie or video game. Innocent people including children get killed in wars. Quit pushing them.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/07/2008 @ 10:28pm
The B-52 crews refusing to fly had more to do with the fact that their attack and egress routes were never varied which made their bombing raids near suicide since the Vietnamese air defense knew where the planes would be. The pilots had no trouble flying once their attack and egress routes were varied and the bombing raids continued.
Posted by stephend50 at 09/07/2008 @ 11:40pm
I never before had heard the stuff about Mccain causing the fire on the carrier Forrestal. I hope it isn't true. I was a carrier officer (non flying) out there from 1964 to early 1966, and a horrible accident like that one was always in the back of everybody's mind, given the amount of ammo and fuel on those decks. I was on the carrier Ticonderoga during the incident that Johnson used to escalate the war - I was a dumb kid with no political knowledge but even I could tell that something was very wrong here.
I know McCain, not because I served directly with him but I know how Navy pilots are programmed. If he wins this election we will be in and even bigger war within a year or two - look for a draft.
Posted by harleymike at 09/10/2008 @ 04:56am