# Did Kerry commit Treason? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 14, 2004, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256 "2004-10-14T19:58:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/21 "2004-10-15T02:09:05Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > As Scooby Doo would put it, “Absorutely.” > > One may protest a war without committing treason. However, one may not conduct fraudulent investigations, and make a sworn testimony based on lies to indict your comrades, then meet with the enemy, and then work on their behalf. Do those things and you’re a traitor. Kerry did. > > I don’t understand by what definition of “traitor,” and “treason” Kerry’s actions don’t qualify. Well since Kerry didn’t do any of that crap, I guess he’s in the clear. Now quit sliming war heroes. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/22 "2004-10-15T02:11:41Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Really? > > Literally millions of people died in the communist purges that immediately followed our desertion of the North Vietnamese. Millions more have lived in oppression and torture. > > You think that fulfilling our commitment as allies and as simple human beings to save those people would have been evil? Victory was never an option, **Scylla,** and our military presence was doing the South Vietnamese people much more harm than it could ever do them good. The war **was** an evil and it was an evil the U.S. was perpetrating. We should’ve pulled out in 1968 when all of those things became obvious. And I’d like to see a cite for that “millions.” That would put the Vietnamese Communists in the same class as the Khmer Rouge, a comparison I have never heard made by their worst enemies. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/23 "2004-10-15T02:12:12Z")
> [@](#): > > …Not only are you not only allowed to negotiate, you are not allowed to influence negotiations. A prominent antiwar veteran from the other side is sure as shit going to influence things. Kerry’s recommendation and urging that the use except the Vietnamese proposal unchanged is also an influence… You claim “influence” as self-evident, a matter of faith, unless you can demonstrate influence. Did the NV suddenly alter their negotiating position as a result of skullduggery with Kerry? Got a memorandum from Uncle Ho to the AK-47 factory, telling them to cut back production, peace is at hand? What influence can you demonstrate? > [@](#): > > …No. It is aid. Having an advocate fight your propaganda war for you is aid. The way they were able to use Kerry’s testimony to torture POWs is aid… Not his choice. Bobby Kennedy was prominently anti-war at the time of his death. If a POW were confronted with that at the Hanoi Hilton, does that make Bobby a traitor? > [@](#): > > …His actions resulted in a prolongation of the war and the torture and imprisonment of his own countrymen according to many of those POWs… You can, of course, prove this. Being a temperate and reasonable man, you would not slander another without proof. Proof that the NV and VC were on the verge of surrender? They were just about to throw up thier hands and take up knitting, but then Kerry came along? You gotta be kidding. And the POWs undoubtely know a great deal about misery and brutality. Why you offer that as proof of expertise in the strategic thinking of the NV escapes me. What authority do they bring to your argument? Right about the point where you try to indict Kerry for Viet Nam’s long standing hostility with the Montagnards and other indigenous tribes, you take One Step Beyond. I can’t defend a charge so surreal. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/24 "2004-10-15T02:42:42Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Victory was never an option, **Scylla,** You must be joking. We could not have failed to win had we been committed to doing so. Vietnam is a third world country. The Tet offensive was a huge failure in which an entire generation was lost. The North Vietnamese were fighting us with kids and old people. We had the weapons, the money, the personell, the indistrialized society. All we lacked was the will. > [@](#): > > and our military presence was doing the South Vietnamese people much more harm than it could ever do them good. I don’t see how you can possibly justify that. You ever hear the term “boat people?” They weren’t coming to us because they thought we were doing them harm. Seeing as millions were killed in the purges after we left, I cannot see how you can reasonably suggest that they were better off dead or enslaved than they were when we were helping them. > [@](#): > > The war **was** an evil and it was an evil the U.S. was perpetrating. We should’ve pulled out in 1968 when all of those things became obvious. War is evil. War is bad. You seem to have that as an article of faith. I suppose it was an evil for the North to fight to free the slaves. I suppose you think it was an evil for us to get involved in WWII. Your argument is ridiculous. > [@](#): > > And I’d like to see a cite for that “millions.” That would put the Vietnamese Communists in the same class as the Khmer Rouge, a comparison I have never heard made by their worst enemies. [![](http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB6.1B.GIF) ](http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB6.1B.GIF) See lines 635 through 668 ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/25 "2004-10-15T02:48:54Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > I suppose it was an evil for the North to fight to free the slaves. Huh, and here I thought it was all about the right to secede. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/26 "2004-10-15T02:57:03Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > War is evil. War is bad. You seem to have that as an article of faith. I suppose it was an evil for the North to fight to free the slaves. I suppose you think it was an evil for us to get involved in WWII. No, those were justified. The Cold War (and Vietnam was just one theater of operations in the Cold War) was never justified, it was always bullshit. International Communism was never the threat to America that Truman, Eisenhower, et al., made it out to be, and the Domino Theory in Southeast Asia was, in particular, total stinking bullshit. I also don’t see how a government that was propping up all kinds of brutal dictatorships all over the world, just because they were anticommunist or otherwise useful to U.S. interests, could justify something like the Vietnam War on the grounds it was trying to “help” or “protect” people. In Indonesia in 1965-66, our friend Sukarno’s government murdered at least half a million Communists and suspected Communists and might-once-have-met-a-Communists. And don’t get me started on what the CIA did to Chile. That was a true day of shame for America. > [@Scylla](#): > > [http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB6.1B.GIF](http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB6.1B.GIF) > > See lines 635 through 668 I clicked on that but I see nothing but some rows of faint, tiny squiggles running down the left side of the screen – doesn’t look like text at all. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/27 "2004-10-15T02:57:05Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > You claim “influence” as self-evident, a matter of faith, unless you can demonstrate influence. Did the NV suddenly alter their negotiating position as a result of skullduggery with Kerry? Got a memorandum from Uncle Ho to the AK-47 factory, telling them to cut back production, peace is at hand? What influence can you demonstrate? He was able to argue the North Vietnamese negotiating stance to the lawmakers who set policy, and certainly caused Nixon to take notice. That would be influence. > [@](#): > > Not his choice. Bobby Kennedy was prominently anti-war at the time of his death. If a POW were confronted with that at the Hanoi Hilton, does that make Bobby a traitor? Can you give me a cite for where Bobby Kennedy said the Americans were committing genocide, and that war crimes were committed on a day to day basis with the knowledge and cooperation of officers at all levels of command? Can you show me a cite where Bobby betrayed his fellow Veterans and said their mission was to fire on Sampans and villages and kill innocent people? Can you give me a cite where Bobby Kennedy met with the N. Vietnamese without official sanction? If you can than I guess he’s a traitor, too. Otherwise it’s just another example of elucilogic, an invalid comparison. > [@](#): > > You can, of course, prove this. Being a temperate and reasonable man, you would not slander another without proof. Proof that the NV and VC were on the verge of surrender? They were just about to throw up thier hands and take up knitting, but then Kerry came along? You gotta be kidding. I’ve produced the cites previously from former POWS and General Giopp (sp?) of the N. Vietnamese. > [@](#): > > And the POWs undoubtely know a great deal about misery and brutality. Why you offer that as proof of expertise in the strategic thinking of the NV escapes me. What authority do they bring to your argument? Interrogation is a two-way street. Kerry’s testimony was used as a justification for their torture. They were told. > [@](#): > > Right about the point where you try to indict Kerry for Viet Nam’s long standing hostility with the Montagnards and other indigenous tribes, you take One Step Beyond. I can’t defend a charge so surreal. Your inability to mount a defense is hardly a point in your favor. More Elucilogic. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/28 "2004-10-15T03:08:34Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > The Cold War (and Vietnam was just one theater of operations in the Cold War) was never justified, it was always bullshit. International Communism was never the threat to America that Truman, Eisenhower, et al., made it out to be, and the Domino Theory in Southeast Asia was, in particular, total stinking bullshit. Logically, a simple assertion requires only a counterassertion to refute it: You are wrong. Probably that simple assertion is as unsatisfying to you as yours are to me, so I’ll suggest you ask the Dominos instead: [http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=5138](http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=5138) > [@](#): > > I also don’t see how a government that was propping up all kinds of brutal dictatorships all over the world, just because they were anticommunist or otherwise useful to U.S. interests, could justify something like the Vietnam War on the grounds it was trying to “help” or “protect” people. In Indonesia in 1965-66, our friend Sukarno’s government murdered at least half a million Communists and suspected Communists and might-once-have-met-a-Communists. And don’t get me started on what the CIA did to Chile. That was a true day of shame for America. I don’t see how anything this country does can be any good since we stole it from the Indians. > [@](#): > > I clicked on that but I see nothing but some rows of faint, tiny squiggles running down the left side of the screen – doesn’t look like text at all. That’s weird. The same thing just happened to me when I clicked it. I found that if I moved the mouse down to the bottom left a little box appeared that looked like a picture frame with arrows. When I clicked it, the table came up and the squiggles disapeared. Please try it again and see if you can get a result. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/29 "2004-10-15T03:09:48Z")
I wonder if the military took some sort of action against Kerry in the 1970’s? According to [this paper](http://www.nysun.com/article/3107), there are a lot of irregularities around Kerry’s discharge: > [@](#): > > BY THOMAS LIPSCOMB - Special to the Sun > October 13, 2004 > > An official Navy document on Senator Kerry’s campaign Web site listed as Mr. Kerry’s “Honorable Discharge from the Reserves” opens a door on a well kept secret about his military service. > > The document is a form cover letter in the name of the Carter administration’s secretary of the Navy, W. Graham Claytor. It describes Mr. Kerry’s discharge as being subsequent to the review of “a board of officers.” This in it self is unusual. There is nothing about an ordinary honorable discharge action in the Navy that requires a review by a board of officers. > > According to the secretary of the Navy’s document, the “authority of reference” this board was using in considering Mr. Kerry’s record was "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163. "This section refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry’s involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn’t have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry’s status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge. > > A Kerry campaign spokesman, David Wade, was asked whether Mr. Kerry had ever been a victim of an attempt to deny him an honorable discharge. There has been no response to that inquiry. The document is dated 1978. My question is, if Kerry negotiated with the North Vietnamese while still an officer of the U.S. military, did he violate the UCMJ? The article thinks it is possible that Kerry got a bad conduct discharge in 1972 due to his anti-war activities, and then in 1978 when a friendly President was in the White House and Vietnam was over, he managed to get his BCD reviewed and converted into an honorable discharge. Does this sound plausible? This would also explain why Kerry refuses to sign his Form 180 and release all his military records. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/30 "2004-10-15T03:18:05Z")
> [@](#): > > Does this sound plausible? No. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/31 "2004-10-15T03:25:10Z")
Gee, thanks. Another sterling contribution. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/32 "2004-10-15T03:31:51Z")
It’s your theory. Prove it. If you can’t prove it then your just wasting everyone’s time with pointless insinuations. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/33 "2004-10-15T03:34:52Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Probably that simple assertion is as unsatisfying to you as yours are to me, so I’ll suggest you ask the Dominos instead: > > [http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=5138](http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=5138) That cite says nothing that goes to my main point, which is that the Cold War, on America’s part, was not justified. > [@Scylla](#): > > That’s weird. The same thing just happened to me when I clicked it. I found that if I moved the mouse down to the bottom left a little box appeared that looked like a picture frame with arrows. When I clicked it, the table came up and the squiggles disapeared. > > Please try it again and see if you can get a result. I found the table but it’s hard to read. There’s three “estimated dead” columns labeled “Low,” “Mid” and “High” – not clear what that means. Also says “000” implying, but not very clearly, that all figures in the column must be multiplied by 1,000. At any rate, if I’m reading this right, the figures for “Democide by Vietnam 1975-87” seem trivial compared to the figures for democide by the South Vietnamese government, Diem and post-Diem. The figures labeled “U.S. War Crimes” are also pretty disturbing. And there’s also figures for democide by Koreans, which makes no sense at all. Where did this table come from, anyway? From the Wikipedia (generally a pretty thorough and impartial source) – [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History\_of\_Vietnam:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Vietnam:) > [@](#): > > **True Independence** > > The Japanese surrendered to the Allies in August 1945, and the Communist Viet Minh under Ho Chi Minh aimed to take power. Due to the Japanese associations, Ho was able to persuade Bao Dai to abdicate on August 25, 1945, handing power to the Viet Minh – an event that greatly enhanced Ho’s legitimacy in the eyes of the Vietnamese people. Bao Dai was appointed “supreme adviser” in the new government in Hanoi, which asserted independence on September 2. In 1946 Vietnam gained its first constitution and a new title: the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV). > > Vietnam descended into violence – rival Vietnamese factions clashing with each other and with the French. The First Indochina War lasted until 1954, when the Viet Minh won a major victory at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu. > > The USA, nervous since the war of Ho Chi Minh’s communism, became strongly opposed to the idea of a Vietnam run by Ho after his government of the north, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, in 1950 gained recognition from the Soviet Union and China. In the south in the same year, the government of Bao Dai in Saigon was recognized by the United States and the United Kingdom, but did not enjoy wide popular support. > > The Geneva Conference involved a Chinese-inspired, supposedly temporary partition of the country into North and South. Bao Dai had intentions to take full control of South Vietnam, and from his home in France appointed the religious nationalist Ngo Dinh Diem as Prime Minister. However, in 1955 Diem used a referendum to remove the Emperor and took control of the South himself, managing to win American support. In 1959 the country’s constitution was rewritten with a more explicit Communist flavour. > > In response to the failure of establishing unifying elections, the National Liberation Front (NLF or Viet Cong) was formed as a guerrilla movement in opposition to the South Vietnamese government. (The RVN and the US referred to the NLF as Viet Cong, short for Viet Nam Cong San, or “Vietnamese Communist”. The NLF itself never went by this name.) In response to the guerrilla war, the United States began sending military advisors in support of the government in the South. This escalated into what is called the Vietnam War, or the “Second Indochina War”. > > The war lasted until 1975, when the North finally gained control over all of Vietnam. In 1976, Vietnam was officially reunited under the North Vietnamese government as “The Socialist Republic of Vietnam”. > > In 1979 China invaded Vietnam in response to Vietnam’s invasion of Cambodia. The Sino-Vietnamese War was brief, but casualties were high on both sides. The country’s third constitution, based on that of the USSR, was written in 1980. > > **Reforms** > > In 1986 Vietnam, under new leader Nguyen Van Linh, abandoned its attempt to maintain a purely planned economy. Many restrictions on private enterprise were lifted, and the education system was liberalised. In 1995 Vietnam joined the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). A stock exchange opened in 2000. However, journalism and political dissent are still strictly controlled, and Vietnam is still a one-party state. Democracy, human rights, and religious freedom advocates continue to be arrested. Nothing about genocide or anything close. Now, this is from the article about Cambodia – [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History\_of\_Cambodia:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Cambodia:) > [@](#): > > **Democratic Kampuchea (1975-1979)** > > Main article: Democratic Kampuchea > > Immediately after its victory, the CPK ordered the evacuation of all cities and towns, sending the complete urban population out into the countryside to work as farmers. Two reasons were given. First, the population was starving due to farmers migration to cities to avoid the advancing fighting. Second, the CPK was trying to reshape society into a model that Pol Pot had conceived. > > Thousands had been starving and dying of disease prior to the CPK takeover. Thousands starved or died of disease during the evacuation and its aftermath. Many of those forced to evacuate the cities were resettled in newly created villages, which lacked food, agricultural implements, and medical care. Many who lived in cities had lost the skills necessary for survival in an agarian environment. Thousands starved before the first harvest. Hunger and malnutrition–bordering on starvation–were constant during those years. Most military and civilian leaders of the former regime who failed to disguise their pasts were executed. > > Within the CPK, the Paris-educated leadership–Pol Pot, Ieng Sary, Nuon Chea, and Son Sen–was in control. A new constitution in January 1976 established Democratic Kampuchea as a Communist People’s Republic, and a 250-member Assembly of the Representatives of the People of Kampuchea (PRA) was selected in March to choose the collective leadership of a State Presidium, the chairman of which became the head of state. > > Prince Sihanouk resigned as head of state on April 4. On April 14, after its first session, the PRA announced that Khieu Samphan would chair the State Presidium for a 5-year term. It also picked a 15-member cabinet headed by Pol Pot as prime minister. Prince Sihanouk was put under virtual house arrest. > > The new government sought to completely restructure Cambodian society. Remnants of the old society were abolished and religion, particularly Buddhism and Catholicism, was suppressed. Agriculture was collectivized, and the surviving part of the industrial base was abandoned or placed under state control. Cambodia had neither a currency nor a banking system. > > Life in ‘Democratic Kampuchea’ was strict and very brutal. In many areas of the country people were rounded up and executed for speaking a foreign language, wearing glasses, scavenging for food, and even crying for dead loved ones. Former businessmen and bureaucrats were ruthlessly hunted down and killed along with their entire families; the Khmer Rouge feared that they held beliefs that could lead them to oppose their regime. A few Khmer Rouge loyalists were even killed for failing to find enough ‘counterrevolutionaires’ to find and execute. > > Solid estimates of the numbers who died between 1975 and 1979 are not available, but it is likely that hundreds of thousands were brutally executed by the regime. Hundreds of thousands died of starvation and disease (both under the CPK and during the Vietnamese invasion in 1978). Some estimates of the dead range from 1 to 3 million, out of a 1975 population estimated at 7.3 million. The CIA estimated 50,000-100,000 were executed from 1975 to 1979, mostly around the time of the invasion by Vietnam. Note, the number of dead is mentioned, as precisely as it is possible to say. Now, if anything close to that scale had happened in postwar Vietnam, I think the Wikipedia would have mentioned it. In short, I ain’t buyin’ it. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/34 "2004-10-15T03:49:18Z")
BTW, **Scyllla:** Rightly or wrongly, **most** Americans – about 2/3, according to Gallup polls – believe the Vietnam War was both immoral and a mistake, and that has been the case pretty consistently ever since 1968. From “Long Division,” by Michael Tomasky, in _The American Prospect,_ October 2004 – [http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=8539:](http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=8539:) > [@](#): > > The Gallup Organization has taken care to track American public opinion on this question every few years since the Vietnam War ended. The results are beyond dispute. By overwhelming margins, Americans have always believed – and continue to believe – that the Vietnamese conflict was wrong. Gallup has asked two questions over the years. First, did the United States make “a mistake in sending troops to fight in Vietnam, or not”? Second, was the war (and were other wars in U.S. history) “just” or “unjust”? In both cases, the pro-war position comes up very short. Gallup began asking a version of the “mistake” question in 1965. The first majority calling the war a mistake appeared in August 1968, after the Tet Offensive and Walter Cronkite’s famous anti-war editorial at the end of his newscast on the night of February 27 of that year. After the war’s 1975 conclusion, Gallup has asked the question five times, in 1985, 1990, 1993, 1995, and 2000. And all five times – over that 15-year period that saw vast social change, the raging of the culture wars, and dramatic shifts to the right in American public opinion on several issues – respondents were consistent in calling the war a mistake by a margin of more than 2 to 1: by 74 percent to 22 percent in 1990, for example, and by 69 percent to 24 percent in 2000. > > Similarly, vast majorities continue to call the war “unjust.” While substantial majorities retrospectively support World War II (90 percent), the Korean War (61 percent), and the Gulf War (66 percent), fully 68 percent of Gallup respondents in 1990 considered the Vietnam War unjust, and 25 percent thought it just. Four years later, the numbers were 71 percent to 23 percent. Only in 2004 – after September 11, with American soldiers engaged in combat on two fronts, and with martial rhetoric from the incumbent administration a daily feature of national life – did the numbers change. But even then, they changed just a little: 62 percent still consider Vietnam unjust, while 33 percent defend it. > > It’s at least very interesting and at most rather remarkable that Americans, who tend to forgive their country pretty much everything on the matter of how it conducts its global affairs, have settled so firmly into the conviction that their nation was so wrong about something so important. Another 1995 Gallup question even found a majority of 52 percent agreeing with the assertion that the war was “fundamentally wrong and immoral,” as opposed to the 43 percent who called it a “well-intentioned mistake.” And while it can be argued that the 33 percent of pro-Vietnam respondents in the 2004 poll still represents a decent chunk of the population, it’s also the case than in electoral terms, 33 percent constitutes a fractional minority. The similar percentage of Americans that opposed the Iraq War in the early months of 2003 was uniformly written off by the media as marginal, disgruntled, and unimportant. So public opinion on this question couldn’t be clearer. There is no great Vietnam divide. Americans are more divided over carbohydrates than they are over Vietnam. If the execs at Sinclair Broadcasting are expecting that airing _Stolen Honors_ on their stations is going to cost Kerry any votes, they are going to be unpleasantly suprised. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/35 "2004-10-15T03:56:03Z")
> [@Sam](#): > > …My question is, if Kerry negotiated with the North Vietnamese while still an officer of the U.S. military… Its this simple, **Sam**. Kerry has stated that he was not negotiating. You have no proof otherwise. I put it to you that a charge as serious as you are leveling requires rather more. An interesting thing, though, a breaking story from the New York _Sun_. Of course, the liberal media are ignoring this blockbuster, which would tear the Kerry campaign apart, if it got any attention. Then perhaps the _Sun_ might have a Puliltzer Prize to add to its bountiful collection of journalistic accolades, as it clambers for a place of respectability next to the _Moonie News_. > [@Scylla](#): > > …He was able to argue the North Vietnamese negotiating stance to the lawmakers who set policy, and certainly caused Nixon to take notice. That would be influence… What, they hadn’t heard about it? Kerry treacherously revealed the NV negotiating position to the innocent and untainted lawmakers? Surely they already knew? Just as surely, they were aware of Sen Kerry’s position on the war before his trip to Paris, as well as the opinions of many others. So any of them who expressed such an opinion, in an effort to influence lawmakers, they are treacherous as well? What about all this “redress of grievances” stuff? Chuck it out because Dick Nixon says so? > [@](#): > > …I’ve produced the cites previously from former POWS and General Giopp (sp?) of the N. Vietnamese… Why are we to believe that former POW’s have some special insight into the NV Politburo, and thier deliberations? While I certainly respect and regret thier suffering, it doesn’t make them experts in the inner working of the ruling councils of NVietNam anymore than it qualifies them as neurosurgeons. As to Gen. Giap, you tried to present that “cite” before, it’s somewhere between tenuous and bogus. Surely you remember? [Amazon.com](http://Amazon.com)? The Swiss? > [@](#): > > …The North Vietnamese consider the man a hero for the aid he provided them, and they have his picture hanging in a place of honor in the war remnants museum… I’ve tried to track that story down, without success, only hearing other hearsay of a different slant, to the effect that the picture of Kerry hangs next to a picture of McCain, honoring thier efforts on behalf of recognition and reconciliation. But my hearsay is no better than yours, unless, of course, your citation is simply another sworn statement from the freepers or the swifities. > [@](#): > > …Elucilogic… Good luck with that. **Scyllagism** is better. Scansion, my boy, scansion! ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/36 "2004-10-15T04:03:52Z")
**elucidator** , if you and DTC would stop jerking your knees for a minute, you might notice that I did not offer that link as an assertion, or make any claim about its accuracy. I asked a QUESTION. I used the link as background material. I don’t know the paper, I have no idea if it’s reputable. The information in the link seems interesting enough for debate. I don’t know if it’s true. But hey, I don’t want to spoil a good bluster, so go ahead. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/37 "2004-10-15T04:06:16Z")
Kneejerking? Now simply saying “No” is kneejerking? ---
**Author:** ![rfgdxm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c0e974/32.png) [@rfgdxm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rfgdxm)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/38 "2004-10-15T04:06:17Z")
Going back to the original question, I presume there is a statute of limitations on a treason charge? If so, Kerry is in the clear. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/39 "2004-10-15T04:26:44Z")
> [@](#): > > You must be joking. We could not have failed to win had we been committed to doing so. Vietnam is a third world country. The Tet offensive was a huge failure in which an entire generation was lost. The North Vietnamese were fighting us with kids and old people. We had the weapons, the money, the personell, the indistrialized society. All we lacked was the will. We couldn’t have have won the war without occupying North Vietnam. And that was impossible; if we had tried China (and maybe the Soviet Union) would have almost certainly sent their own troops in to fight us. This is the same reason the Korean War ended in a stalemate. > [@](#): > > The war was an evil and it was an evil the U.S. was perpetrating. We should’ve pulled out in 1968 when all of those things became obvious. > [@](#): > > War is evil. War is bad. You seem to have that as an article of faith. I suppose it was an evil for the North to fight to free the slaves. I suppose you think it was an evil for us to get involved in WWII. Once again you’re inventing things. Saying one particular war was evil is not the same as saying every war is evil. If it was, I could say that you calling a Presidential candidate a traitor is the same as saying every Presidential candidate is a traitor. And if so, I’m offended by you calling great Americans like Washington, Jackson, Clay, Lincoln, Grant, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and Michael Dukakis a pack of traitors. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256/40 "2004-10-15T04:35:25Z")
[According to the BBC](http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A715060) > [@](#): > > An estimated total of 2,122,244 people were killed during the war in Vietnam. Of these, 58,169 were Americans. Of those Americans, 11,465 were teenagers. An estimated 3,650,946 additional people were wounded, of whom 304,000 were Americans. 153,329 Americans were categorized as ‘seriously’ wounded. That total includes 10,000 amputees. > An estimated 444,000 North Vietnamese and 220,557 South Vietnamese military personnel and 587,000 civilians were killed. When people speak of “the killing fields,” they are referring to Cambodia. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-kerry-commit-treason/269256.md?page=3)