So what's the story behind John McCain and the USS Forrestal Incident that killed so many?

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I like people who have integrity and honor. Are these qualities I should abandon?

If I am without principle, my stated policies are worthless. They become whatever they need be to get elected. Suppose Obama or McCain if you like, say they will do X, because they know it appeals? That's the marketers approach. Do anything, say anything, because once you are in office you do whatever you want, and the public be damned. We've gotten that from politicians for far too long.

No, the standard is too low.

No, they're not qualities you should abandon. But the way the campaigns attack or don't attack is not the only measure of those qualities, by far.

You're off the deep end a bit with the fantasies about these 'completely lie in the campaign and do whatever you want in office' candidates.

The negative campaigning is far less an indication of their 'honor and integrity' than other issues, and doesn't even touch on whether the attacks are true.

It's a little like deciding what car to buy based on the salesman not pressuring you. It's a valid concern, but not the main one to use in picking a car. You shouldn't need an Accord but instead spend far more on a broken down used Hummer over how you are pressudred by the salesman, any more than you should get a candidate whose military and domestic priorities will meet your needs about as well as the Hummer because his campaign wasn't nice. I'm all for high standards - but in the important areas, not just a small one.

I think the campaign marketers eat the people for lunch who vote for the easily manipulated 'image' issues. Hold them to a high standard on policies too.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
He was doing a hotshot trick where you let fuel go into your engine and make a big flame come out the back on takeoff. He did it in the face of the F-4 to mess with him. This cooked off the missile that started the whole thing. Most of this is covered up though because he was a good ole boy.

I haven't seen any evidence of that beyond unsupported internet claims.

I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
He was doing a hotshot trick where you let fuel go into your engine and make a big flame come out the back on takeoff. He did it in the face of the F-4 to mess with him. This cooked off the missile that started the whole thing. Most of this is covered up though because he was a good ole boy.

Proof please.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Cad, do you know the difference between being a surrogate and backing somebody? You back McCain so I guess anything you say reflects poorly on mccain.

Nope, I do not back McCain.... try again...

Try keeping up...

Clark isn't a surrogate for BHO? OK, then when is BHO going to denounce Clark's lame attack?

THAT is what I posted in response to Harvey's bleating.

You're kidding right? To prove you are full of shit in respect to my response and Harvey's here's the full initial exchange:

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Is this the "tangental" type of attacks that the left and DNC is going to use to try to discredit McCain's service? Sure, it won't be overt.... but damn with Clark's recent attacks and this, I'm beginning to wonder how low BHO will let them go before he denounces this stuff.

Speaking of spreading the FUD, did you see Obama or anyone from his organization attack McCain over this, tangentially or any other way?

If anyone is pitching a "tangential" attack, maybe it's that guy you see in the mirror when you're shaving. :roll:

Clark isn't a surrogate for BHO? OK, then when is BHO going to denounce Clark's lame attack?

I'm just commenting that there seems to be a "surge" of this sort of crap from the left lately and it has to be coming from somewhere...unless you believe it's all just a big coincidence...

First, in respect to your discussion with harvey, YOU OBVIOUSLY fucked up since you brought up Clark in DIRECT response to Harvey's quote.

Harvey: neither obama nor his people brought up this (forrestal) in this or any other way.
Tard: Didn't clark do that!


Second, YOU OBVIOUSLY had no idea since you were suggesting CLark was a BO surrogate. You are now going to claim you didn't mean it that way but you're probably the only person who believes your own B.S.

Either learn English or learn to lie better.

I brought up Clark BEFORE that response to harveybot which the quote shows. Also, can you not read my respose to harveybot? I posed the question about surrogate, and then said "OK"(meaning harvey would likely say no) then asked when he was going to denounce the lame attack. BHO has not denounced the lame attack, he spouted his usual generalities about "patriotism" and the like.

:roll: You obviously don't know how to read/comprehend if you think the second part of that statement(you know the one that started with "OK") wasn't a continuation of the posed question(which I assumed his answer to).

But hey, if you want to blame me for your mis-comprehending then fine...suit yourself.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
OK Cad your turn.

Precisely what did Clark say? No sound bites please we had that with McCain and gas prices earlier.

Transcript

 

[BoomerD]

It depends on whose version of the story you believe.With McCain's daddy being an Admiral, the facts have been..."sanitized" and his files also "sanitized...

http://judicial-inc.biz/82jjohn_mccain_and_the_uss_forresta.htm


As for "politicizing" his Vietnam experiences...is that any different than the Swiftboaters did to Kerry in 04?
Why should that be acceptable and questioning McSame is not?

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/

http://www.vietnamveteransagai...mccain_lost_five_u.htm

Perhaps the BIGGEST reason I consider McSame unfit for the Presidency:

http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm#keating

http://www.azcentral.com/news/...ccainbio-chapter7.html

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
It depends on whose version of the story you believe.With McCain's daddy being an Admiral, the facts have been..."sanitized" and his files also "sanitized...

http://judicial-inc.biz/82jjohn_mccain_and_the_uss_forresta.htm


As for "politicizing" his Vietnam experiences...is that any different than the Swiftboaters did to Kerry in 04?
Why should that be acceptable and questioning McSame is not?

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/

http://www.vietnamveteransagai...mccain_lost_five_u.htm

Perhaps the BIGGEST reason I consider McSame unfit for the Presidency:

http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm#keating

http://www.azcentral.com/news/...ccainbio-chapter7.html

Im not sure any site claiming its all a jewish conspriacy is the best source.

"McCain's various stories never added up. Somehow, he was at the center of the USS Forrestal fire. His father covered up the biggest war crime in American naval history, the USS Liberty attack, and saved Israel. Now, McCain is shot down over Vietnam, and the Jewish/Communists supposedly tortured him half to death? After what McCain's father did for the Communists, he could have demanded anything.

The Zionists cooked the Forrestal story for a reason. They said McCain was on the catapult, but video shows he wasn't.

Whether Obama, Clinton, or McCain get elected doesn't matter. They will all do what the Zionists tell them to do. The Americans will need a fiscal collapse to motivate them, and then they will seek a electoral impeachment/recall."

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
OK Cad your turn.

Precisely what did Clark say? No sound bites please we had that with McCain and gas prices earlier.

Transcript

I quoted Clark in an earlier post. Which of his points do you dispute?

• "John McCain's military service does not automatically qualify him to be commander in chief."
  
• "I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in the armed forces, as a prisoner of war."
  
• "He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee and he has traveled all over the world, but he hasn't held executive responsibility," Clark said. "That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded ? that wasn't a wartime squadron."
  
• "Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president,"

The thrust of Clark's statement is that piloting a fighter, or getting shot down in one, does not automatically qualify McCain to be President. He said nothing to demean the value of McCain's service or otherwise challenge his patriotism. In fact, he said exactly the opposite.

What's your freaking point?

And my name is Harvey. That's with a capital "H," and there's no "bot" in my name. If you want to continue calling me harveybot, should I start calling you CADtroll?

 

[RKDaley]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
BHO has not denounced the lame attack, he spouted his usual generalities about "patriotism" and the like.

Separately, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said, "As he's said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by General Clark."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories...tics/main4220128.shtml

Again, Sen. Obama said he rejects the statement by Wes Clark. What else do you want him to say?

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: RKDaley

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
BHO has not denounced the lame attack, he spouted his usual generalities about "patriotism" and the like.

Separately, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said, "As he's said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by General Clark."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories...tics/main4220128.shtml

Again, Sen. Obama said he rejects the statement by Wes Clark. What else do you want him to say?

I think Clark's comments were quite reasonable, but McCain made a false attack on Obama over them:

At a news conference in Harrisburg, Pa., McCain was asked about Clark's comments.

"I think that that kind of thing is unnecessary," McCain said. "I'm proud of my record of service, I have plenty of friends, leaders who will attest to that.

"The important thing is if that's the kind of campaign Senator Obama and his surrogates and supporters want to engage in, I understand that. But it doesn't reduce the price of gas by one penny. It doesn't achieve our energy independence or make it come any closer. Doesn't make any American stay in their home who's at risk of losing it today. And it certainly doesn't do anything to address the challenges Americans have in keeping their jobs, homes and supporting their families."

He brings in 'Obama and his surrogates', though neither Obama nor his surrogates were involved in Clark's statement.

Now that Obama 'rejected' it, McCain hasn't withdrawn his attack.

 

[ProfJohn]

I think the left is going after McCain's military service as a way to discredit it and therefore make Obama's lack of service less of an issue.

It is similar to me calling Craig or Harvey a hack and hoping that everyone focuses on that and ignores the fact that I'm a hack as well.

BTW at least seven Democrats have gone after McCain's war record, seems like a lot of be purely coincident. I am sure these guys know that Obama's lack of service and his lack of experience is a weakness for him and thus are trying to lessen McCain's service.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Craig234
What is more relevant, perhaps, are the Vietnamese who were burned to death by the bombs McCain and the crew dropped, for no good reason.

Just because you're too big of a pussy to serve your country doesnt make it right for you to consistently shit on those that have.

what an ass...

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: Craig234
What is more relevant, perhaps, are the Vietnamese who were burned to death by the bombs McCain and the crew dropped, for no good reason.

Just because you're too big of a pussy to serve your country doesnt make it right for you to consistently shit on those that have.

what an ass...

Just so you guys know when PH tries to make the military into a macho thing he does not speak for all of us.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think the left is going after McCain's military service as a way to discredit it and therefore make Obama's lack of service less of an issue.

It is similar to me calling Craig or Harvey a hack and hoping that everyone focuses on that and ignores the fact that I'm a hack as well.

BTW at least seven Democrats have gone after McCain's war record, seems like a lot of be purely coincident. I am sure these guys know that Obama's lack of service and his lack of experience is a weakness for him and thus are trying to lessen McCain's service.

Pro-Jo: even though a lot of times you make posts that irritate the shit out of me, then you come and make posts like this. Awesomeness.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: Craig234
What is more relevant, perhaps, are the Vietnamese who were burned to death by the bombs McCain and the crew dropped, for no good reason.

Just because you're too big of a pussy to serve your country doesnt make it right for you to consistently shit on those that have.

what an ass...

Just so you guys know when PH tries to make the military into a macho thing he does not speak for all of us.

not "macho"... the word you're looking for is "honorable."

I can only hope that it applies to my service, one day, HALF as much as it does to McCain's.

You? I have no idea what you've done, or where you've been, so I won't pass judgement...

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think the left is going after McCain's military service as a way to discredit it and therefore make Obama's lack of service less of an issue.

It is similar to me calling Craig or Harvey a hack and hoping that everyone focuses on that and ignores the fact that I'm a hack as well.

BTW at least seven Democrats have gone after McCain's war record, seems like a lot of be purely coincident. I am sure these guys know that Obama's lack of service and his lack of experience is a weakness for him and thus are trying to lessen McCain's service.

Excuse me?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: Craig234
What is more relevant, perhaps, are the Vietnamese who were burned to death by the bombs McCain and the crew dropped, for no good reason.

Just because you're too big of a pussy to serve your country doesnt make it right for you to consistently shit on those that have.

what an ass...

Just so you guys know when PH tries to make the military into a macho thing he does not speak for all of us.

not "macho"... the word you're looking for is "honorable."

I can only hope that it applies to my service, one day, HALF as much as it does to McCain's.

You? I have no idea what you've done, or where you've been, so I won't pass judgement...

Calling someone a 'pussy' for not doing it is nothing but bravado, and in no way does the presence or absence of military service matter as to if someone can criticize the military or not. Let people shit away.

I've also been to Vietnam and seen the effects of our bombing and defoliation efforts there. It would do us all some good to remember that wars have consequences to real, decent people. This doesn't make McCain bad for participating in the war, I'm sure he thought he was doing the right thing. If you're going to think about the terrors the Vietnamese visited upon him though, you would be well served to consider the terrors he visited upon them.

 

[alchemize]

Idiot dems on the path to self destruction again.
"I wouldn't characterize anybody who fought in Vietnam as a war hero," said Medea Benjamin, a co-founder of the theatrical anti-war group Code Pink. "In 23 bombing sorties, there must have been civilians that were killed and there's no heroism to that."


Nice to see that Craig234 and the founder of Code Pink can try and out-left each other Same talking points?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Idiot dems on the path to self destruction again.
"I wouldn't characterize anybody who fought in Vietnam as a war hero," said Medea Benjamin, a co-founder of the theatrical anti-war group Code Pink. "In 23 bombing sorties, there must have been civilians that were killed and there's no heroism to that."


Nice to see that Craig234 and the founder of Code Pink can try and out-left each other Same talking points?

Please. I remember four years ago when Republicans (including myself) were looking deep into Kerry's Vietnam service. Now no one has the right to question McCain's? You don't have a monopoly on criticism and controversy.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: alchemize
Idiot dems on the path to self destruction again.
"I wouldn't characterize anybody who fought in Vietnam as a war hero," said Medea Benjamin, a co-founder of the theatrical anti-war group Code Pink. "In 23 bombing sorties, there must have been civilians that were killed and there's no heroism to that."


Nice to see that Craig234 and the founder of Code Pink can try and out-left each other Same talking points?

Please. I remember four years ago when Republicans (including myself) were looking deep into Kerry's Vietnam service. Now no one has the right to question McCain's? You don't have a monopoly on criticism and controversy.

It didn't work out well for the republicans then, and it will be doubly bad for the dems now.

It's especially stupid now. When it was Bush vs. Kerry, Kerry was the better "war hero". Now we're going to compare Obama to McCain? Pah-lease!

For the record, if I had to vote today it would be for Obama. But that doesn't change my general disgust for the far left.

 

[Taejin]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: alchemize
Idiot dems on the path to self destruction again.
"I wouldn't characterize anybody who fought in Vietnam as a war hero," said Medea Benjamin, a co-founder of the theatrical anti-war group Code Pink. "In 23 bombing sorties, there must have been civilians that were killed and there's no heroism to that."


Nice to see that Craig234 and the founder of Code Pink can try and out-left each other Same talking points?

Please. I remember four years ago when Republicans (including myself) were looking deep into Kerry's Vietnam service. Now no one has the right to question McCain's? You don't have a monopoly on criticism and controversy.

It didn't work out well for the republicans then, and it will be doubly bad for the dems now.

It's especially stupid now. When it was Bush vs. Kerry, Kerry was the better "war hero". Now we're going to compare Obama to McCain? Pah-lease!

For the record, if I had to vote today it would be for Obama. But that doesn't change my general disgust for the far left.

When it was Bush vs Kerry, it was an overprivileged son of politically well connected parents who dodged serving and couldn't even attend his duties correctly VERSUS a man who served honorably and bravely under fire.

Obama vs McCain don't even compare, seeing as how Obama was never drafted, never was part of the military, and McCain is from another generation.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: RY62

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: shinerburke
A rocket under an F4-Phantom on the deck misfired. McCain just happened to be lucky enough to be sitting in the aircraft that the misfired rocket struck.

What luck. Then after that he gets shot down and gets a warm bed at the Hanoi Hilton.

In case you missed the memo from the Obamessiah:

"For those like John McCain who have endured physical torment in service to our country ? no further proof of such sacrifice is necessary," Obama said. "And let me also add that no one should ever devalue that service, especially for the sake of a political campaign, and that goes for supporters on both sides."

No one made this about politics until you brought it up. I just mentioned that the guy has bad luck.

Or good luck. Most people in an airplane that get hit by a missile don't survive.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Cad, do you know the difference between being a surrogate and backing somebody? You back McCain so I guess anything you say reflects poorly on mccain.

Nope, I do not back McCain.... try again...

Try keeping up...

Clark isn't a surrogate for BHO? OK, then when is BHO going to denounce Clark's lame attack?

THAT is what I posted in response to Harvey's bleating.

You're kidding right? To prove you are full of shit in respect to my response and Harvey's here's the full initial exchange:

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Is this the "tangental" type of attacks that the left and DNC is going to use to try to discredit McCain's service? Sure, it won't be overt.... but damn with Clark's recent attacks and this, I'm beginning to wonder how low BHO will let them go before he denounces this stuff.

Speaking of spreading the FUD, did you see Obama or anyone from his organization attack McCain over this, tangentially or any other way?

If anyone is pitching a "tangential" attack, maybe it's that guy you see in the mirror when you're shaving. :roll:

Clark isn't a surrogate for BHO? OK, then when is BHO going to denounce Clark's lame attack?

I'm just commenting that there seems to be a "surge" of this sort of crap from the left lately and it has to be coming from somewhere...unless you believe it's all just a big coincidence...

First, in respect to your discussion with harvey, YOU OBVIOUSLY fucked up since you brought up Clark in DIRECT response to Harvey's quote.

Harvey: neither obama nor his people brought up this (forrestal) in this or any other way.
Tard: Didn't clark do that!


Second, YOU OBVIOUSLY had no idea since you were suggesting CLark was a BO surrogate. You are now going to claim you didn't mean it that way but you're probably the only person who believes your own B.S.

Either learn English or learn to lie better.

I brought up Clark BEFORE that response to harveybot which the quote shows. Also, can you not read my respose to harveybot? I posed the question about surrogate, and then said "OK"(meaning harvey would likely say no) then asked when he was going to denounce the lame attack. BHO has not denounced the lame attack, he spouted his usual generalities about "patriotism" and the like.

:roll: You obviously don't know how to read/comprehend if you think the second part of that statement(you know the one that started with "OK") wasn't a continuation of the posed question(which I assumed his answer to).

But hey, if you want to blame me for your mis-comprehending then fine...suit yourself.

I could believe it was just poor sentence structure on your point if you didn't have a tastelikechicken tendency to misrepresent what you've said yourself. You can bark now about "generalities" when the truth is everybody knows it was a rejection of clark's statements.

So why are you rejecting the rejection? Because it came hours before you posted probably.

SPeaking of which, did you see McCain's response to a question about obama's patriotism? Now that was a non-answer for the ages.

 

[Lemon law]

What is deeply disturbing to me about McCains service to our country, is the fact that he seeming didn't learn a damn thing from the Vietnam war. A war we lost regardless if anyone bought Nixon's peace with honor or not. And here we are three and a half decades later, and the McCain answer is stay the course, the same stay the course that bought us 58,000 uselessly killed in losing effort in Vietnam. Not to mention the few million innocent civilians who died in the region.

At least Johnson soon understood he had over reached and had no answer. But both the Vietnamese war and the Iraq war were justified on the basis of a congressional resolution the respective Presidents misused and abused.

John Kerry rose to public attention after honorably serving, when he became a critic of the Vietnam war in general and the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in the specific. Which made it somewhat surprising that a Senator Kerry later voted for the even more phony congressional resolution that gave the then untested GWB a blank check. Call it bad luck if you will, Kerry never did explain that flip flop failure satisfactorily to the American voter, and it probably cost him the election. But seemingly if there was one Senator who should have understood the danger of a blank check resolution, that Senator should have been John Kerry.

But going back, John Kerry voted against Gulf War one under GWB's father and took a lot of political heat for it. And IMHO, GHB did the run up to Gulf War One in an extremely careful and internationally responsible manner. Sadly after achieving a rapid and almost total victory, GHB lost his way, and was unprepared for the next step.
And instead of demanding the removal of Saddam, he allowed Saddam to butcher the very groups GHB vowed to protect. Thus sowing the seeds for the next war and proving the word of the USA was not to be trusted.

But McCain is hardly unique, our entire country seems learning disabled and addicted to denial and hypocrisies.

 

[RKDaley]

Originally posted by: Craig234
I think Clark's comments were quite reasonable [..]

Yes, particularly in light of of the context:

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Because in the matters of national security policy making, it's a matter of understanding risk. It's a matter of gauging your opponents, and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in Air- in the Navy that he commanded, it wasn't a wartime squadron. He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall. He hasn't seen what it's like when diplomats come in and say, 'I don't know whether we're going to be able to get this point through or not. Do you want to take the risk? What about your reputation? How do we handle it-'??

Bob Schieffer: Well-??

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: ' -it publicly.' He hasn't made those calls, Bob.??

Bob Schieffer: Well, well, General, maybe-??

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: So-??

Bob Schieffer: Could I just interrupt you. If-??

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Sure.??

Bob Schieffer: I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down. I mean-??

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President.?

Wesley Clark was responding to Schieffer's comment that Barack had not gotten shot down in a plane by saying that is not a qualification to be president.
Schieffer introduced the "shot down in a plane" argument, not Clark.