 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Brytani
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 4
|
 Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 6:20 am Post subject: Re: So-why do democrats support a self-professed war crimina |
 |
|
| 95 bxl wrote: | | Just wondering. I think it would be enlightening to find out. |
Why should they care, after all, Kerry's crimes during war are all Bush's fault anyway....
Remember, Democrats still suppor a senator who was in the KKK. Judgement is reserved for Republicans only, never fellow Democrats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Why should they care, after all, Kerry's crimes during war are all Bush's fault anyway.... |
I don't understand...are you saying that if Bush and Cheney had actually served in Vietnam, the war would have ended earlier without these "crimes"?
I'm not so sure they'd have actually helped matters. But indeed, morale was severely hampered by the sons of the powerful and well placed who managed to wangle slots in Reserve or National Guard units.
Of the many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal and owe equal allegiance to their country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brytani
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I don't understand.... |
Of couse you don't understand, you're a liberal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Seriously, where did Kerry blame Bush for what you call his "war crimes?" Do YOU even understand? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brytani
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | | Seriously, where did Kerry blame Bush for what you call his "war crimes?" Do YOU even understand? |
Let's see if you get this. One of the most used "defenses" democrats throw out (as you have done yourself) when attempting to defend Kerry's own admittance of war crimes, is that Bush was AWOL from the National Guard. A charge that has no backing evidence btw.
So which is it, Kerry committed war crimes and admitted to them because in off the wall liberal minds, Bush was AWOL or is it just thrown out because there is no justification in Kerry's own declaration that he committed war crimes and watched those around him commit the same.
Btw, don't give me the crap about Kerry not knowing what was going on while he was in Vietnam and only came to the realization that his acts were against the Geneva Convention and war crimes after he returned from his 4 month service. Kerry, being an officer received through training on the Geneva Convention and what was expected of him and the troops he was charged to lead. As an officer, he had the responsibility as well as the knowledge to not commit war crimes himself but to turn in those under him who did so.
The question should be, why didn't Kerry turn in a single person during his 4 month stint if he saw so many acts against the Geneva Convention? Furthermore, why did he not turn himself in when he commit war crimes as he has admitted time and time again to doing? Once again, as an officer, Kerry had the obligation to do just that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can see why you were confused on that one.
Nobody thought Bush had anything to do with Kerry's behavior in Vietnam. The point was that Kerry was put in a difficult position that virtually all of the GOP leadership didn't have to worry about, namely being under orders to commit what he later believed might be atrocities.
This is easily confused with kerry "admitting he's a war criminal" if you're trying to exaggerate for hyperbolic effect.
I kind of agree with you about these people saying Bush was AWOL. Bush was never labeled a deserter or AWOL simply for not showing up. His commanders may have wondered just where the hell he was for months at a time, but they knew better than to classify him as AWOL. They weren't stupid, you know! His daddy was a Congressman, for christsakes!
Here's a good article about the flotsam and jetsam and detritus that BushCorp released on his record.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/03/politics/main615317.shtml
No DD214's but lots of consternation from his superiors in what Bush has released, found here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-02-14-bush-docs.htm
Everything asked of Kerry by this group here is completely absent in the Bush documents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brytani
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 4:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | I can see why you were confused on that one.
Nobody thought Bush had anything to do with Kerry's behavior in Vietnam. The point was that Kerry was put in a difficult position that virtually all of the GOP leadership didn't have to worry about, namely being under orders to commit what he later believed might be atrocities.
This is easily confused with kerry "admitting he's a war criminal" if you're trying to exaggerate for hyperbolic effect.
I kind of agree with you about these people saying Bush was AWOL. Bush was never labeled a deserter or AWOL simply for not showing up. His commanders may have wondered just where the hell he was for months at a time, but they knew better than to classify him as AWOL. They weren't stupid, you know! His daddy was a Congressman, for christsakes!
Here's a good article about the flotsam and jetsam and detritus that BushCorp released on his record.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/03/politics/main615317.shtml
No DD214's but lots of consternation from his superiors in what Bush has released, found here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-02-14-bush-docs.htm
Everything asked of Kerry by this group here is completely absent in the Bush documents. |
Kerry himself admitted to committing war crimes as well as watching others do the same. Or has this simple little point slipped your liberal mind? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 4:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Brytani"] | sparky wrote: |
Kerry himself admitted to committing war crimes as well as watching others do the same. Or has this simple little point slipped your liberal mind? |
I have expressed a numberof times how I enjoy such juvenile remarks as this.
And I have asked a number of times how one manages to reason it out that Kerry comitted war crime by what he did following the same orders as did many others running the same boats and they not be war criminals as much.
Now I have another question. How many Swift Boat commanders received silver stars and commendation from their crews who claim that the captian saved their lives? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
We've been through this Brytani...
| Quote: | | Kerry himself admitted to committing war crimes as well as watching others do the same |
He was describing these routine activities that everyone from Zumwalt on down understood to be standing orders:
o Shootings in free fire zones.
o Harassment and interdiction fire.
o Using 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people.
o Search and destroy missions
o Burning of villages.
I personally don't believe that this necessarily qualifies as an "atrocity" and I know of no judicial body that has interpreted them as such. Kerry, after the insight in such matters that only time can give, concluded that they were not atrocities.
And he never said "war crimes" in reference to himself or his 9 brothers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JN173
Commander
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 341
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | After all, these things were routine, came from the top, and characterize the war in Vietnam:
o Shootings in free fire zones.
o Harassment and interdiction fire.
o Using 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people.
o Search and destroy missions
o Burning of villages.
But Kerry was wrong: they're not atrocities and he was too hard on himself when he said they were. |
I agree and if he had only accused himself, we could all shake hands and go home. BUT he said "yes I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed.......... All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare. All of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions .......".
I am one of the thousands that he slandered by that statement. More importantly by that statement he slandered the memory of men I knew like Milton Olive, MOH, and Robert Gipson, DSC and many, many more. We participated in free fire zones, H&I fire, and Search & Destroy missions. These where not and are not immoral, atrocities, or crimimal acts.
Mr. Kerry owes the veterans of Vietnam an apology.
_________________
A Grunt
2/503 173rd Airborne Brigade
RVN '65-'66 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Selective editing, JN173.
I listed the "atrocities" Kerry was describing (and that you expunged) and while it may have seemed that they were atrocities at the time, the wisdom that comes from time say no, they were not.
However, what you accuse Kerry of ... the silly "war crimes" charge ... is precisely what was done systematically and daily in Vietnam and you just admitted to doing them yourself.
The only way you can make this charge stick is by editing and misrepresenting Kerry's statement.
You quoted him this way:
| Quote: | | BUT he said "yes I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed.......... All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare. All of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions.. |
What he REALLY said before you ran it through Winston Smith's parser:
| Quote: | | There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down. And I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals. |
You should find a job in rightwing journalism. They do stuff like that all the time. Big Brother would be envious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JN173
Commander
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 341
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: |
However, what you accuse Kerry of ... the silly "war crimes" charge ... is precisely what was done systematically and daily in Vietnam and you just admitted to doing them yourself. |
Sparky:
Take a deep breath. 
Please read what I said. I did not accuse Mr. Kerry of war crimes. What I said was that by his statment Mr. Kerry accused me and everyone I served with of having committed atrocities and war crimes.
I can confirm that those items I named were done on a daily bases. The only 50's I ever saw I was on the receiving end and we didn't burn any villages that I saw. I don't believe any of the 5 items rise to the level of immorality that Mr. Kerry ascribed to them. However, I've never heard him back off of the statements fully. He always has to nuance his statements.
My point is that Mr. Kerry is either by his definition a "war criminal" or he has made some very disparaging, false statements about his "Brothers".
_________________
A Grunt
2/503 173rd Airborne Brigade
RVN '65-'66 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, but that kind of misquoting just bugs me, expecially when the intent is so transparent.
And looking back, you're right! You never directly accused Kerry of being a "war criminal." Then at the end of your last post, you bring up the possibility of Kerry being a "war criminal." It didn't take long. Funny how fast innuendo can snowball.
Anyway, Kerry didn't accuse "you and everyone you served with of having committed atrocities and war crimes." I believe you think this, but I don't believe it's true. You may not agree that those things you did were atrocities, but at the time Kerry thought so.
Kerry opponents here have wanted it both ways as any review of this bbs would show: Kerry was a war criminal but we were not. Kerry committed atrocities and said so himself. But those things weren't actually atrocities because we did them on a daily basis. Kerry can't blame the DOD brass for knowing about the atrocities even though these very things were explicitly documented orders and navy policy issued from the top.
If Kerry had said "everyone in Vietnam committed atrocities or war crimes" I'd think you have a point. Saying those things were widespread was truthful, as so many vets here are acknowledging.
What this boils down to is similar to the "code of silence" in any strongly-cohesive (and often uniformed) organization that wants to retain honor, respect, and dignity but believes the only way to do so is to hide things that are dishonorable. To do this, they have to attack those who "break ranks."
It happens to all whistle-blowers. I have no doubts that the soldier who reported the treatment of Iraqi prisoners is undergoing the same shunning and attacks. Hopefully, it won't haunt him thirty years later. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JN173
Commander
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 341
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: |
And looking back, you're right! You never directly accused Kerry of being a "war criminal." Then at the end of your last post, you bring up the possibility of Kerry being a "war criminal." It didn't take long. Funny how fast innuendo can snowball.
. |
Let's try saying it this way. I see 2 possibilities.
The 5 items John Kerry admitted to are atrocities and therefore he and everyone who performed any of those specific items are guilty of atrocities, crimes, whatever term.
or
The 5 items are not atrocties then Mr. Kerry is guilty of bearing false witness by claiming they were.
| Quote: |
Anyway, Kerry didn't accuse "you and everyone you served with of having committed atrocities and war crimes."
|
"same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed "
Sounds like an accusation to me. 
_________________
A Grunt
2/503 173rd Airborne Brigade
RVN '65-'66 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 11:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Doesn't sound like "everyone" (your quote). So I'll say it again:
Anyway, Kerry didn't accuse "you and everyone you served with of having committed atrocities and war crimes." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
