2006-06-13 09:17:03 · 5 answers · asked by olli1965 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
From my understanding it was established that Kerry was in Vietnam. Exposed, to a degree, with the potential of losing his life. On the other hand, Pres Bush avoided conflict by "flying" in the state of alabame while in the guard. I served during the gulf war. I would find it difficult for someone who did not serve to question my record of service when theirs is "questionable".
2006-06-13 09:38:35 · update #1
True why compare their records just because Bush was a coward and did not fight in the Vietnam War. Why does that matter? Fact is Bush knew he was a coward and questioned Kerry's record so people would not look at his own. It is always nice when a leader refuses to fight himself but can send people to get killed to fight for him.
2006-06-13 10:03:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Although I understand this question is actually a political statement, nonetheless I will answer the question. Just because you think Pres. Bush has a record that "pales" in comparison to Kerry's doesn't logically conclude to a solid reason for not questioning Kerry's war record. Rather during the election of 2004 both the President and Kerry should have been questioned on their war records.
2006-06-13 16:30:02 · answer #2 · answered by John P 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The trouble with Kerry's war record was the idea that Kerry was manipulating his record. For instance, the claim on his first Purple Heart is either two guys on a boat that saw nothing that night (yet Kerry still got wounded) or there were two guys with several Vietnam prisoners getting attacked from the river's edge. In either case no battle field report was filled out (Kerry could have done just that) saying they made contact with the enemy.
2006-06-13 16:27:08 · answer #3 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why is there a need to compare? Every veteran has his own history of service. To say one is better then the other because of Military record isn't very logical. remember, "All gave some, and some gave all"
2006-06-13 16:37:24 · answer #4 · answered by The Old Moose 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
'Cause they've already elected him twice and after that saying "ermm, maybe not" is probably not the wisest thing to do.
2006-06-13 16:21:10 · answer #5 · answered by A Shade Of Grey 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋