# John Kerry--Opinion of hero/protester **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 18, 2004, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860 "2004-02-18T20:11:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![braintree](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@braintree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/braintree)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2004, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860/21 "2004-02-21T19:20:18Z")
The basic wing-nut argument essentially boils down to this: If you honestly appraised the war in Vietnam you were a traitor because the truth was so horrible that openly ackowleding it gave aid and comfort to the enemy. Therefore, lying about or deying what happened was, and in some quarters, remains, an act of patriotism. Not much of a prescription for democracy, is it? The recent equivalent was the candard about how people who had doubts about going into Iraq — doubts which by now have been abundantly vindicated — were obejectively pro-Saddam. Playing nice with these people hasn’t worked. If things are ugly now you must first consider the source problem: the Republican wing-nut smear machine. It’s going to get ugly and stay ugly for quite some time because it has to. These people must be politically defeated or we’re truly and totally fucked. They are the greatest danger to our democracy since the Great Depression. ---
**Author:** ![bryanl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/43a26b/32.png) [@bryanl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bryanl)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2004, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860/22 "2004-02-21T19:32:07Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Bullshit. How is it Kerry’s fault that his testimony was twisted by the enemy? How does it show an “abuse of freedom” by Kerry? > > You’re crossing the line here, dude. Apolgize or I’ll see you in the pit. > > the result of the anti-war movement was to _end the war_. You were whining in another thread about “ad hominems” being hurled against your own precious “twisted” interpretations, indeed. “ad hominem” ?? There is a need to make a difference between attacking someone with innuendo or allegation and describing what they did or said. The two are not the same and often a confusion in such an issue leads to insight into the integrity of the positions being presented. Accusations of “whining” are ad hominem. Descriptions of what was said can lead others to the same conclusion but would also be more conducive to honest discussion and clarification of perceptions. As far as the Vietnam war protestors conducting a war of their own: Is the invasion of buildings and the destruction of personal property a proper expression of the US political process? I don’t think so. When civil disobedience is raised to an obligation despite other methods being readily available there is reason to believe that the stated goals of that civil disobedience are also as disengenuous. There is also the problem of what propaganda and deceit does for freedom and rights. To accuse the US solder en mass of despicable habits is just such propaganda. To call someone a liar because they do not agree with you or because you do not like them is also a deceit. To make serious accusations or allegations (AWOL, Deserter, Traitor, etc) without equally serious supporting evidence is also a deceit. As far as the eternal requests for citation, it does sound so responsible, but it can also be irresponsible if the intent is to overlook mountains to find ant hills. Kerry’s words are in his book (as is Gen Giap’s) and in his speeches and in his votes. ---
**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:** [February 21, 2004, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860/23 "2004-02-21T19:38:33Z")
I find this whole debate over who did what 35 years ago to be absolutely silly. The John Kerry of 1970 is NOT the same John Kerry that is running for president today. Neither is the George Bush of today the same person that he was 30 years ago. Debating these candidates based on whether a 25 year old John Kerry chucked his medals over a fence, or whether a 25 year old George Bush was diligent in his guard duties is to _trivialize_ the real issues facing everyone today. Both of these men have long, extensive records of behaviour and policy extending back over the past 10-15 years. THAT is what the debate is about. Frankly, the whole reason this Vietnam debate is in the public eye again is because Kerry decided to play up his Vietnam heroism against Bush’s Guard days in order to nullify the natural advantages Republicans have when it comes to defense policy. Of course, 12 years ago when another Kerry (Bob Kerry, who won a _Medal of Honor_ in Vietnam) tried to use his Vietnam credentials against Bill Clinton who completely ducked military service, John Kerry said, “We need to put the divisiveness of that war behind us and stop judging people based on what they did in the Vietnam era”. That was good advice then. He should have stuck to it now, because now that he’s trying to introduce Vietnam back into the political debate he has opened himself up to criticism of what he did after he got back to the war. And that’s a shame, because it’s an issue that is _irrelevant_. But Democrats can’t have it both ways - they can’t try to use Kerry’s heroism in Vietnam in his favor, then cry foul when Republicans point out his less than honorable behaviour when he came back. And Republicans can’t have it both ways - they can’t point to his actions after the war without opening themselves up to the charge that Bush didn’t even go to Vietnam, and ducked out of the Guard early. So both sides are going to be the rotten duplicitous bastards that they are, trying to spin this whole thing in their favor… In the meantime, we have a few million people trying to destroy our way of life, a retirement system that is going to collapse in 10-15 years, and government spending that is out of control. But no one’s talking about that, because all we care about is what some kid did 30 years ago. It’s ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![dal\_timgar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a88e57/32.png) [@dal\_timgar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dal_timgar)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2004, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860/24 "2004-02-21T19:49:26Z")
One thing I like about Patton is that he admitted he loved war. I don’t understand the position but I like his honesty. I watched a program about Vietnam where they interviewed an American sniper and he referred to being behind enemy lines as being in “Indian Country.” I think there are people who love killing and they don’t really care why. They just need a good rationalization. People like that could easily regard Kerry as a traitor. Dal Timgar > [@Matchka](#): > > To amuse myself on my commute yesterday I was listening to a particularly inane morning radio show. On the agenda were, of course, a couple of yes-man, knuckle-dragging DJs and some guy who seemed versed in the histories of the Democratic & Republican candidates for the 2004 presidential election. I can’t recall his name or credentials. Sorry. But he brought something up that confused me, and the more I think about it, the less I understand its relevance or soundness of logic. > > He asserted that Kerry was _slippery & self-interested_ (my summation) because he was a highly decorated Nam Veteran–medals for courage, proud purple heart events, etc. and then turned coat on his fellow soldiers through his anti-war protests and resulting alies & tactics. > > Personally, I don’t see the contradiction–Kerry seems to have been a hell of a fighter who was interested in ending a crazy war. I don’t know many soldiers/veterans who think war (especialy one as little-understood and little-supported as Viet Nam) is a good way to spend time; and I would assert that a push to end the fighting, irrespective of tactics & bedfellows, shows compassion for all parties involved–Us and Them. > > Am I missing something or is the radio guy a mud-slinging cook trying to drive a wedge between Kerry & military foax? ---
**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:** [February 21, 2004, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860/25 "2004-02-21T20:13:37Z")
> [@bryanl](#): > > “twisted” interpretations, indeed. > > “ad hominem” ?? There is a need to make a difference between attacking someone with innuendo or allegation and describing what they did or said. The two are not the same and often a confusion in such an issue leads to insight into the integrity of the positions being presented. Accusations of “whining” are ad hominem. Descriptions of what was said can lead others to the same conclusion but would also be more conducive to honest discussion and clarification of perceptions. There isn’t any confusion about what you said. You accused all Vietnam protesters of “waging war on America,” a patently ridiculous statement, and a sweeping _ad hominem_ attack on millions of good people, including some highly decorated veterans. You have not described anything that they actually “did or said” because “waging war on America” is categorically NOT anything that they did or said. > [@](#): > > As far as the Vietnam war protestors conducting a war of their own: Is the invasion of buildings and the destruction of personal property a proper expression of the US political process? Yes. You need to study something about civil disobedience. This is a strawman anyway. You cannot generalize the responsiblity for a few incidents into a sweeping characterization of anyone who (rightly) opposed the Vietnam War. What building did John Kerry take over? What did he vandalize? To seriously try to characterize the anti-war movement as a 'War on America" amounts to little more than raving. > [@](#): > > When civil disobedience is raised to an obligation despite other methods being readily available there is reason to believe that the stated goals of that civil disobedience are also as disengenuous. Sometimes civil disobedience is the most effective way to bring change. Rosa Parks didn’t _have_ to remain seated in the front of the bus. Civil Rights changes would have come about anyway but probably not as fast. In any case, this is still more strawman bullshit. Most Vietnam protesting was peaceful and legal. Certainly Kerry’s actions were. > [@](#): > > There is also the problem of what propaganda and deceit does for freedom and rights. To accuse the US solder en mass of despicable habits is just such propaganda. Good thing Kerry never did that, then. > [@](#): > > To call someone a liar because they do not agree with you or because you do not like them is also a deceit. And that’s exactly what you’re doing to Kerry. > [@](#): > > To make serious accusations or allegations (AWOL, Deserter, Traitor, etc) without equally serious supporting evidence is also a deceit. And in the case of the Shrubster, plenty of evidence _does_ exist. > [@](#): > > As far as the eternal requests for citation, it does sound so responsible, but it can also be irresponsible if the intent is to overlook mountains to find ant hills. Kerry’s words are in his book (as is Gen Giap’s) and in his speeches and in his votes. I’ll take that as an admission that you can’t support your own assertions. ---
**Author:** ![Master\_Wang-Ka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/master_wang-ka/32/3325_2.png) [@Master\_Wang-Ka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Master_Wang-Ka)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2004, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860/26 "2004-02-21T22:07:31Z")
Diogenes’ rebuttal is pretty eloquent. I can’t add much to it… > [@bryanl](#): > > There is a responsibility that goes with this freedom. > > If what you say is used by the enemy to harm your fellow soldiers, then you have abused that freedom. > > If what you say is false or misleading, then you have abused that freedom. Well, yes. Responsibility is the flip side of freedom. Are you then proposing that any speech which could be harmful to another equals abuse of freedom? That political correctness and silence should be made mandatory? I am not aware that Kerry made any untrue statements. Did he? I was also not aware he had broken any laws, invaded any property, destroyed anything, or done anything other than speak his mind about the Vietnam War. If I am wrong in this assertion, kindly correct me. Include cites. Are you seriously saying that any former soldier sacrifices his right of free speech re: the war in which he fought? I mean, I would think no one HAD a greater right to speak out than someone who did his time and served his country. What, we gonna take his vote away, too? After all, he might misuse that, too, to the detriment of his countrymen… ---
**Author:** ![bryanl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/43a26b/32.png) [@bryanl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bryanl)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2004, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860/27 "2004-02-21T23:39:09Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I’ll take that as an admission that you can’t support your own assertions. yes, its fairly obvious that you take things only in the way that fits your needs and desires. So you create arguments that don’t exist to refute. best of luck with the delusions. ---
**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:** [February 21, 2004, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860/28 "2004-02-21T23:50:00Z")
> [@bryanl](#): > > yes, its fairly obvious that you take things only in the way that fits your needs and desires. So you create arguments that don’t exist to refute. > > best of luck with the delusions. You must be accustomed to message boards where you are not expected to support your own assertions. It doesn’t work that way here. I’m sure that will be unfortable for you but get used to. If you make spurious assertions in a GD thread you will get called on it…and you _have_ been. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2004, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860/29 "2004-02-22T00:21:26Z")
What “spurious assertions?” All he said was that Kerry was a liar, a traitor, and a committed agent for the destruction of all that is good and noble. We have his word on that! Really, I don’t know what more evidence you need! I mean, there he was with “Hanoi Jane” even _before_ she went on her giddy little trip. Do you have any proof, any proof at all, that she wasn’t there to plot the trip with Kerry? I didn’t think so! Of course Kerry is an insidious reptilian hippy-commie peacenik! So am I. So are you, in case you’ve forgotten. By the way, who are you taking to the Trotskyist Ball? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-opinion-of-hero-protester/229860.md?page=1)