 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
 Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 6:08 pm Post subject: So-why do democrats support a self-professed war criminal? |
 |
|
| Just wondering. I think it would be enlightening to find out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What.... no comment? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh, don't worry, as soon as they can figure out a way to drag Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld or Rice into it, they'll have at it...
But don't expect any intelligent argument about Kerry's being a self-professed "war criminal."
Even that low, it fits right in with their Anybody-But-Bush mindset.
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kwinkydink
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 10:53 pm Post subject: Well, I find that the Republican Party |
|
|
definitely offers a larger and more varied assortment of war criminals from which to choose! I will back Bush-Cheney for that reason. I don't want a President who was a war criminal 30 years ago, I want one who is a war criminal NOW! And whose Veep and Sec of Defense are also war criminals!
I just hope they don't have to take too much time off in the second term for those trials in the Hague. That would be a bummer.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
See 95 bxl?
I told ya! 
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Probably because we don't believe the original assertion to be true. Pretty simple, really. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | | Probably because we don't believe the original assertion to be true. Pretty simple, really. |
Which assertion is that? Do you need to hear Kerry condemn himself as a war criminal? Or will the quote do?
What Corporate Media don't want you to Remember...
What Skull & Bones Kerry don't want you to Know/Remember...
Portion of John Kerry remarks on NBC's "Meet the Press" May 6, 2001:
MR. RUSSERT: You mentioned you're a military guy. There's been a lot of
discussion about Bob Kerrey, your former Democratic colleague in the
Senate, about his talking about his anguish about what happened in Vietnam. You were on this program 30 years ago as a leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. And we went back and have an audiotape of that and some still photos. And your comments are particularly timely in this overall discussion of Bob Kerrey. And I'd like for you to listen to those with our audience and then try to put that war into some context:
(Audiotape, April 18, 1971):
MR. CROSBY NOYES (Washington Evening Star): Mr. Kerry, you said at one time or another that you think our policies in Vietnam are tantamount to genocide and that the responsibility lies at all chains of command over there. Do you consider that you personally as a Naval officer committed atrocities in Vietnam or crimes punishable by law in this country?
KERRY: 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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eecee
Ensign
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 52
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
The answer is yes, I will be proud to vote for a man who was willing to admit to following procedures that he later believed to be in violation of the laws of warfare, and to speak up about it quite publicly.
Last edited by eecee on Mon May 10, 2004 3:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| And Kerry never admitted to being a "war criminal" no matter how dramatic it sounds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | | And Kerry never admitted to being a "war criminal" no matter how dramatic it sounds. |
Yet another confirmation of leftist self-delusion.
Any reasonable individual would call an individual who has admitted to committing "atrocities" of the type Kerry engaged in as guilty of war crimes.
Thus, the fact that you refuse to believe you support a war criminal is meaningless. Evidence of Kerry being a war criminal is, for example, far stronger then evidence of Bush "deserting," but that doesn't stop you people for a second.... does it?
Medals over the fence or no... John Kerry is a self-admitted war criminal, guilty of "atrocities" in war time. That is far more despicable then any action Bush ever took... or Clinton, for that matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 4:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
All of the quotes posted here do not show Kerry admitting to being a "war criminal." His use of the word "atrocity" means he did things and saw things that were atrocious. In fact, his recounting of the incident with Gardner sounds like an atrocity:
As Gardner recalls it, he was in the "tub" above the pilot house with the twin machine guns, and Kerry was in command, when the Navy swift boat came upon a sampan in the darkness. Gardner flashed a searchlight and ordered the craft to stop. Then, he said, he saw a figure rise up over the gunwale with a semiautomatic weapon. Spotting tracers in the sky and fearing an attack, Gardner said, he laced the sampan with bullets, and other crew members fired as well. Gardner recalls a man in the sampan falling overboard, presumably dead.
After the shooting had stopped and Kerry had ordered a cease-fire, Gardner said, the crew found a woman in the sampan who was alive. There was also the boy, dead in the bottom of the boat. Gardner said there is no way to know which crewmate fired the shots that killed the boy, but he said Kerry was in the pilot house and did not fire. Kerry was livid when he emerged, Gardner said.
"Kerry threatened me with a court-martial, screaming at the top of his lungs: `What the hell do you think you're doing? I ought to have you court-martialed,' " Gardner recalled. "Thankfully, the whole crew was there in the middle of it . . . they verified there were weapons being shot at us. That was the end of it."
This was an atrocity but it doesn't make Kerry a 'War Criminal" any more than Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster.
You guys are really fond of these dramatic words. I have to say I'm proud of the conservatives for not just outright calling Kerry a "baby killer" as conservatives in another conference I post in do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | | All of the quotes posted here do not show Kerry admitting to being a "war criminal." |
Sparks,
You can call a banana an apple if you like. That doesn't make it so.
Kerry committed atrocities. Said so himself. Thus, he is a war criminal.
But your hyperbole aside, lets look at an absolute fact.
YOU support someone who admits to committing atrocities. (I say they're war crimes. For whatever senseless, self-delusional reason, you don't. But you CANNOT disagree that Kerry has admitted to committing atrocities... atrocities that YOU now know about... and you support him anyway.)
And there can be NO excuse for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 5:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks for acknowledging that the term "war criminal" is not Kerry's.
I think he was a bit hard on himself. The things he's calling atrocities are actually rather tame by Vetnam standards:
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.
Nothing about dead babies, ear necklaces, raping children, etc... It sounds like he's just being too hard on himself, especially considering the extent to which he was caught between grunts like Gardner who probably wanted to frag him and his superiors who ordered him to do at least one of the above items.
And for Godsakes, he's not a "war criminal" and never called himself one<gr> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks for acknowledging that the term "war criminal" is not Kerry's.
|
Are you, like, off your medication or something? War criminal could easily be tattooed across Kerry's forehead.
I recognize that accepting his criminality requires a level of reasonableness and common sense missing in most Kerry supporters, but please... you're GOT to be able to do better then this.
| Quote: |
I think he was a bit hard on himself. |
How nice for you. Admitting that one is a war criminal by confessing to atrocities has nothing to do with being a "bit hard on one's self. But you need anything you can to avoid facing the reality of supporting a self-confessed war criminal, so I can understand why you would think that way.
| Quote: |
The things he's calling atrocities are actually rather tame by Vetnam standards: |
I'm sorry, Sparky, to find out that atrocities in your world are divided into "rather tame" from something else. I don't know that the Geneva Convention makes that distinction... so, I'll just stick with them for now... OK?
| Quote: |
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. |
So... if he were tried and convicted on those charges, which he inarguably would be under the Geneva Convention, how many decades would he have had to serve behind bars, eh?
| Quote: |
Nothing about dead babies, ear necklaces, raping children, etc... It sounds like he's just being too hard on himself, especially considering the extent to which he was caught between grunts like Gardner who probably wanted to frag him and his superiors who ordered him to do at least one of the above items. |
And if Gardner or any of Kerry's former superiors ever decide to run for President, then that can become an issue for them.
| Quote: |
And for Godsakes, he's not a "war criminal" and never called himself one<gr> |
He IS a war criminal and confirmed it by admitting to committing atrocities, your protestations notwithstanding. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Are you, like, off your medication or something? War criminal could easily be tattooed across Kerry's forehead. |
We'll just have to disagree. But I appreciate the conservatives here who acknowledge that Kerry never called himself a "war criminal."
| Quote: | | He IS a war criminal and confirmed it by admitting to committing atrocities, your protestations notwithstanding. |
But, as has been mentioned here, Kerry reconsidered the things he did and realized that, while shootings in free fire zones etc.., are morally wrong, they're probably not atrocities.
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. Even the conservatives here don't really think these things were atrocities. They're just angling for some way to smear Kerry.
It's just politics, disgusting as it is.
Amusing that if Kerry had refused those orders, you guys would be calling him a traitor for disobeying orders.
Last edited by sparky on Mon May 10, 2004 7:25 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| 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
