bottom line-- military issues WILL be on the front burner for the forseeable future, so Kerry had to offer evidence that he is willing to deal with them intelligently rather than diving in on a whim and hoping, like Bush.

We need exactly what Kerry proposed...a bit larger regular force who knows what they are getting into, and some emphasis on 'special forces' with special skills....and leave the National Guard alone! except for real emergencies.

The Republicans ARE going to (and have already) suggest that Kerry's service in 'Nam was too 'short' and tainted by 'minor' wounds, so why NOT show the folks who served with Kerry and respected everything he did? (If Kerry had been shot BAD, they'd just say he was too dumb to duck!)

Kerry DID volunteer, he DID serve...and he didn't like a lot of what he saw once he was there, like a lot of others. A man of courage and committment would protest and complain about that....that doesn't make him a flip-flopper OR a traitor...he protested bad behavior of a few and bad leadership at the top, not brave soldiers or his country in general. (Who has listened to the tapes of LBJ trying to figure out how to get out of that mess and practically admitting he'd dug a hole with no escape! Bush has done that too, but he is not smart enough to see what dumb mistakes he has made)

Is Kerry perfect? Nope...but I see basic 'honesty' and dedication in him...not equivocation or confusion. A man who is honest and aware MUST change some of his views over time, as circumstances change. Those who would rather have a G W Bush, making one decision and holding to it as we all sink deeper into the Big Muddy Sandy, are welcome to him!