Admiral speaks out, disputes Kerry's account of 1st wound

[adios]

From the article I posted:

[ QUOTE ]
Schachte described the use of the skimmer operating very close to shore as a technique that he personally designed to flush enemy forces on the banks of the Mekong River so that the larger swift boats could move in. Around 3 a.m. on Dec. 2, Schachte said, the skimmer -- code-named "Batman" -- fired a hand-held flare. He said that after Kerry's M-16 rifle jammed, the new officer picked up the M-79 and, "I heard a 'thunk.' There was no fire from the enemy," he said.

[/ QUOTE ]

From the what you quoted in your post:

[ QUOTE ]
For the record, Purple Hearts are given for the following enemy-related injuries:

a) Injury caused by enemy bullet, shrapnel or other projectile created by enemy action.

b) Injury caused by enemy-placed mine or trap.

c) Injury caused by enemy-released chemical, biological or nuclear agent.

d) Injury caused by vehicle or aircraft accident resulting from enemy fire.

e) Concussion injuries caused as a result of enemy-generated explosions.


[/ QUOTE ]

to which you commented in your post:

[ QUOTE ]
In this account Kerry does not claim to br under enemy fire. Those on his boat were firing and he may have been injured by shrapnel from one of his crewmates or from his own gun. Neverless they were involved in enemy action.

So his injury fits the requirements for purple heart. If his superiors did not think he deserved one they should not have approved it.


[/ QUOTE ]

To which I reply huh?

From a) of the criteria

enemy bullet, shrapnel or other projectile

From b) of the criteria

enemy-placed mine or trap

From c) of the criteria

enemy-released chemical, biological or nuclear agent

From d) of the criteria

vehicle or aircraft accident resulting from enemy fire

From e) of the criteria

enemy-generated explosions

Where in Schachte's account do any of these criteria apply?

Where was the

-- enemy bullet, shrapnel or other projectile created by enemy action

or the

-- enemy-placed mine or trap

or the

-- enemy-released chemical, biological or nuclear agent

or the

-- vehicle or aircraft accident resulting from enemy fire

or the

-- enemy-generated explosions ?????????

[theBruiser500]

It seems to me it's impossible to tell what's bullshit from what isn't in this debate. There is so much bullshit coming from everywhere, and so many ads that are just to win voters not to tell the truth that this whole thing is just BULLSHIT.

I don't know too much about the specifics (and I'm not even going to try and figure it out because people in this debate aren't really trying to get the truth out, just win the argument), but even going by the worst accounts of what Kerry did in Vietnam (what do the worst accounts say, that he got medals he didn't deserve?) this is orders of magnitude better than what Bush did during the Vietnamese war. And really, stepping back for a moment to look at the debate over Kerry's Vietnamese record, it is mostly nuances we are debating.

So in conclusion, this whole thing is stupid.

[cardcounter0]

Here's how Dole described the incident that earned him his first Purple Heart: "As we approached the enemy, there was a brief exchange of gunfire. I took a grenade in hand, pulled the pin, and tossed it in the direction of the farmhouse. It wasn't a very good pitch (remember, I was used to catching passes, not throwing them). In the darkness, the grenade must have struck a tree and bounced off. It exploded nearby, sending a sliver of metal into my leg — the sort of injury the Army patched up with Mercurochrome and a Purple Heart."

[adios]

Charges of fraud in being awarded medals are nuances? Puhleze. Kerry has stated that he committed atrocities in Viet Nam and you call this an order of magnitude better than what Bush did during the Viet Nam war?

[MaxPower]

Brinkley was referring to this part

[ QUOTE ]
a) Injury caused by enemy bullet, shrapnel or other projectile created by enemy action.

[/ QUOTE ]

I posted this the other day.

http://neds.nebt.daps.mil/Directives/1650/1650_1g.pdf

[ QUOTE ]

e. Determination of Eligibility. During World War I,
and World War II, and Korea, an individual must have been
wounded as a direct result of enemy action. During subsequent
conflicts (Vietnam and Operation DESERT STORM), the individual
must have been wounded as a result of enemy action (direct or
indirect).



[/ QUOTE ]

Kerry's unit was firing at the enemy and he was injured in the course of this action. It doesn't matter whether the enemy is firing back according to the regulations.

If he was hit by friendly fire than he would qualify.

[cardcounter0]

charges of being AWOL DESERTER are just nuances? Puhleze.
Bush has stated he would have went to Canada if he had to in order to avoid going to Vietnam. You call this an order of magnitude better than what Kerry did during the Viet Nam war?

[adios]

From Schachte's account:

Schachte described the use of the skimmer operating very close to shore as a technique that he personally designed to flush enemy forces on the banks of the Mekong River so that the larger swift boats could move in. Around 3 a.m. on Dec. 2, Schachte said, the skimmer -- code-named "Batman" -- fired a hand-held flare. He said that after Kerry's M-16 rifle jammed, the new officer picked up the M-79 and, "I heard a 'thunk.' There was no fire from the enemy," he said.

You wrote:

Kerry's unit was firing at the enemy and he was injured in the course of this action. It doesn't matter whether the enemy is firing back according to the regulations.

Again huh?

Injury caused by enemy bullet, shrapnel or other projectile created by enemy action

Where was the enemy bullet?

Where was the enemy shapnel?

Where was the enemy projectile?

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
Kerry's unit was firing at the enemy and he was injured in the course of this action. It doesn't matter whether the enemy is firing back according to the regulations.



[/ QUOTE ]

Under the current regulations you are correct. However the Navy regulations in place then stipulated that the wound must be inflicted “from an outside force or agent.” No after-action hostile report was filed and no crewman reported any enemy fire.

In addition his CO at the time Commander Grant Hibbard declined Kerrys application for a purple heart for that time. Three months later when Kerry was reassigned he reapplied under a different commander and got his "get out of Nam free card". He then requested he be reassigned to stateside duty and was.

[cardcounter0]

The doctor at the Cam Ranh base took the shrapnel out of his arm.

Medical report reads: "3 DEC 1968 U.S. NAVAL SUPPORT FACILITY CAM RANH BAY RVN FPO Shrapnel in left arm above elbow. Shrapnel removed and appl. Bacitracin. Ret. to duty."

I'm not sure what happened to the shrapnel after that.

[MaxPower]

[ QUOTE ]

Under the current regulations you are correct. However the Navy regulations in place then stipulated that the wound must be inflicted “from an outside force or agent.” No after-action hostile report was filed and no crewman reported any enemy fire.



[/ QUOTE ]

Good try Wake Up CALL. The words you are quoting are taken from the link I posted and are still in the regulations. That is simply the definition of a wound. It has no relevance.

Anyway, shrapnel is an "outside force or agent." Are you telling me that the shrapnel came from within John Kerry's body?