IN VIETNAM?
Yep. Here's what Aldrich has to say about that in an essay in Conservative Truth [sic]:
In the debate about [whether George W. Bush or John Kerry] has given more to his country, no evidence has been more emotionally persuasive than Senator Kerry’s own claims of war heroism. One basis for this assertion is that while serving in Vietnam, Kerry showed great courage in leaping off his boat to attack and kill a wounded North Vietnamese soldier.I don't really have anything else to say about this, except "it has begun."
Evidence suggests the Vietnamese soldier had previously been wounded by a 50-caliber round. Veteran friends of mine tell me if a person is hit by a 50-caliber round, it is highly unlikely they could continue to be a threat, because of the hydro-shock associated with the impact of the round. I am assured this is true regardless of where the enemy was hit.
I know from my own FBI training that certain high-powered rounds can destroy vital organs and blow away entire limbs – due to this same hydro-shock factor. Kerry’s claims that he saved his fellow soldier’s lives by taking the life of the wounded Vietnamese fighter now lie in reasonable doubt.
Also, Kerry’s ardent fans clamor over the Purple Hearts he received for each of his several wounds. What is not widely known is that even a minor wound can qualify for a Purple Heart, and a combination of Purple Hearts can be the basis for reassignment to a safer post. Kerry did, in fact, take a safer post after accepting his war medals.
Other veterans tell me they didn’t even put in for Purple Hearts, because they did not want to be transferred home unless they were seriously wounded. These veterans didn’t want to leave their buddies behind just to seek the safety of distance from the battle.
In total, it appears Kerry was in-country less than five months. Yet some prisoners of war served more than seven years and had many serious wounds.
No comments:
Post a Comment