Pitting Liberal - what a surprise.

The BBQ Pit
61

[QUOTE=magellan01]

Oh, I see, he was just repeating what he heard, which turned out to be unsupported by the facts. And some of the people who did the telling were never even in Vietnam. I guess he was weaselly even way back then. How woulda guessed? And just to prevent some modern day weaseling, cutting off someone’s head does necessarily kill them. I’d call it murder. How about you?

*Please excuse the redundancy.
[/QUOTE]

Is this the "It’s okay for Day to be a scumbag because Kerry was one first"argument?

Is it a fact that atrocities were committed by American troops during the Vietnam War? Is bringing that to the publics attention in order to end a misguided war an act of patriotism or is it being a traitor?

Kerry never excited me much but there’s no real comparison between a man who went to serve and risked his life and someone who avoided combat service {Bush and Kerry} IMO Kerry’s mistake as not fighting back more aggressively. When he went to serve he was doing what he thought was right at the time. When he protested to end the war he was also doing what he thought was right by trying to end the war and save American lives.

There were bugger issues at stake than who did what during the Vietnam era in 2004 but realistically , comparing Kerry’s service to what Bush did, Kerry wins hands down. I think Kerry handled it badly and lost {we think} as a result.

62

[QUOTE=magellan01]
How about you?
[/QUOTE]
How about me? About me, I don’t give two shits about John Kerry. He’s merely the object. The subject is Bud Day — a mean spirited idiot who desecrates his medals by using the status he believes they give him for political smears. If the senile old fart wants to get on TV and brag about how great he used to be, that’s fine. It’s when he goes on TV to tear down others who served that he’s the same sort of shitface that John McCain is.

63

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
…There were bugger issues at stake …
[/QUOTE]

Made my day.

64

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]

There were bugger issues at stake than who did what during the Vietnam era in 2004 but realistically , comparing Kerry’s service to what Bush did, Kerry wins hands down. I think Kerry handled it badly and lost {we think} as a result.
[/QUOTE]

Are you really satisfied using Bush as a metric for anything? If so, you win, and you’ll find no argument from me. But Kerry’s actions were despicable. It’s absolutely amazing to me that he was able to get elected to the Senate. He just guessed, correctly, that there were enough people fed up with Vietnam that he could ride that pony. Sad. Sad. Sad.

65

[QUOTE=Liberal]
How about me? About me, I don’t give two shits about John Kerry. He’s merely the object. The subject is Bud Day — a mean spirited idiot who desecrates his medals by using the status he believes they give him for political smears. If the senile old fart wants to get on TV and brag about how great he used to be, that’s fine. It’s when he goes on TV to tear down others who served that he’s the same sort of shitface that John McCain is.
[/QUOTE]

Let me get this straight: a highly-respected, highly decorated officer who was in a POW camp when Kerry spewed his bullshit to the senate and otherwise provided aid and comfort to the enemy shares his first-hand knowledge as to the effects of Kerry’s behavior, you call him a shitface. That’s where we are, right?

:rolleyes:

66

You dance around several questions (well, stumble, more like…) that I will put baldly.

There were no such atrocities committed by US troops, as related by the Winter Soldier testimonies? My Lai never happened, for instance?

And if you wish to claim that such reports were exaggerated in number and scope, please advise as to your sources of information, and why, exactly, we should believe them?

I will not permit you to support your position with innuendo and suggestion. You got facts, bring 'em. Got, or no got? Which is it? Time to bring, or STFU.

67

[QUOTE=elucidator]
Made my day.
[/QUOTE]

LOL! whoopsie

[not that there’s anything wrong with that}

68

[QUOTE=magellan01]
Are you really satisfied using Bush as a metric for anything? If so, you win, and you’ll find no argument from me. But Kerry’s actions were despicable. It’s absolutely amazing to me that he was able to get elected to the Senate. He just guessed, correctly, that there were enough people fed up with Vietnam that he could ride that pony. Sad. Sad. Sad.
[/QUOTE]

Are you saying this as someone who voted for Bush? No sarcasm. Sincere question.

I’m saying at that time the comparison was between Kerry and Bush because those were the two candidates right?? Kerry’s service , complete with question marks, and Bush’s avoidance of active duty. I saw Kerry as a man so distorted by years in politics that he didn’t have the wisdom or the courage to take on his attackers. I understand that politicians have to weigh how things will weigh to the general public but I think they over analyze and lose their instincts and guts. I think the public would have respected Kerry more if he fought back with intelligence and directness.

I wasn’t thrilled that the Dems selected Kerry to run but I felt certain he was a better choice than another four years of Bush.

What exactly did Kerry do that was despicable? Protesting the war? Telling of American atrocities?

69

[QUOTE=elucidator]
You dance around several questions (well, stumble, more like…) that I will put baldly.

There were no such atrocities committed by US troops, as related by the Winter Soldier testimonies? My Lai never happened, for instance?

And if you wish to claim that such reports were exaggerated in number and scope, please advise as to your sources of information, and why, exactly, we should believe them?

I will not permit you to support your position with innuendo and suggestion. You got facts, bring 'em. Got, or no got? Which is it? Time to bring, or STFU.
[/QUOTE]

Don’t have to. It fell to the person making the charges, Kerry, to offer the proof. He failed to do so. But feel free to do his bidding and substantiate his accusations. And just because My Lai happened, doesn’t mean all the things Kerry said happened, happened. Surely you’re aware of the flaw in logic there. Now, if you’re truly interested in this, I’m sure there’s an old thread or two and you can search for it. Or buy this. I am not the one to resurrect this issue. Your friend Liberal did, scolding Bud Day for (shivers) speaking his mind, implying that his statements about Kerry’s actions were wrong. Factually and morally. At least that’s how I take what he’s saying. So you can STFU yourself.

70

[QUOTE=magellan01]
Let me get this straight: a highly-respected, highly decorated officer who was in a POW camp when Kerry spewed his bullshit to the senate and otherwise provided aid and comfort to the enemy shares his first-hand knowledge as to the effects of Kerry’s behavior, you call him a shitface. That’s where we are, right?

:rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]

Kerry was trying to end the war so that more Americans wouldn’t die just as lot’s of loyal Americans were. Having risked his life there Kerry had earned the right to speak out against it, just as many other Vietnam vets were doing. I can understand veterans feeling betrayed *at that time * but now, in light of all we know about that period in history, the people that worked hard to end a useless war should be thanked for their efforts rather than called traitors.

71

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
Are you saying this as someone who voted for Bush? No sarcasm. Sincere question.
[/QUOTE]

As I’ve shared on these boards many times, I did not vote for GWBush. Either time. I think the day he was anointed the Republican candidate was a sad day.

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
I’m saying at that time the comparison was between Kerry and Bush because those were the two candidates right?? Kerry’s service , complete with question marks, and Bush’s avoidance of active duty. I saw Kerry as a man so distorted by years in politics that he didn’t have the wisdom or the courage to take on his attackers. I understand that politicians have to weigh how things will weigh to the general public but I think they over analyze and lose their instincts and guts. I think the public would have respected Kerry more if he fought back with intelligence and directness.
[/QUOTE]

I see Kerry as a man who is all veneer. A man who, from an early age, sought to create a facade of what would be seen as a great man. The model for that was JFK, and he sought to emulate him. That’s why he joined the service. Seeing that being an obscure tool of the Navy wouldn’t serve him well in his goals, he sought being part of the action. When he was in it and saw how fucked up it was, he found a way out, gaming the system with technicalities on wounds (3 purple hearts). Seeing that he had no stomach for war (which I certainly do not hold against him), and seeing what was occurring back home, he saw that he was in a unique position to be a major player, the darling of the anti-war movement. And THAT is the pony he rode.

As far as his medals, I think throwing them over the wall was a very principled act, even if it offended me. But then, years later, to attempt to use those same medals as something he was proud of and to trade on the traditional values most Americans see in them was the height of sleaze. The man is a facade with nice hair.

As far as his directness, he has still to release his complete military medical records.

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
I wasn’t thrilled that the Dems selected Kerry to run but I felt certain he was a better choice than another four years of Bush.
[/QUOTE]

You might be right. But there’s no way I could vote for someone who I see as so dishonorable. Bush, with all his MANY faults, but I actually think he is honest. (Or as honest as we get in a politician.)

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
What exactly did Kerry do that was despicable? Protesting the war? Telling of American atrocities?
[/QUOTE]

Using rumors and lies about his fellow soldiers as a platform to launch his next career. Sidling up to Fonda and the gang and thereby giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

72

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
Kerry was trying to end the war so that more Americans wouldn’t die just as lot’s of loyal Americans were. Having risked his life there Kerry had earned the right to speak out against it, just as many other Vietnam vets were doing. I can understand veterans feeling betrayed *at that time * but now, in light of all we know about that period in history, the people that worked hard to end a useless war should be thanked for their efforts rather than called traitors.
[/QUOTE]

His goal might have been commendable, but there are honorable ways to do things and dishonorable. He chose the latter.

73

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
I can understand veterans feeling betrayed *at that time * but now, in light of all we know about that period in history, the people that worked hard to end a useless war should be thanked for their efforts rather than called traitors.
[/QUOTE]

Hardly. Even if you think what Kerry did was just wonderful, you have to allow that other people, even some quite good people, might not feel that way.

We have a system here that allows for these kinds of disagreements.

Maybe Kerry shouldn’t have been called a traitor - but saying he should have been thanked? That’s going too far. And frankly, if he was doing it for the thanks he would receive (and this goes for lots of people doing lots of other things as well) he was doing it for the wrong reasons.

74

Do we have to fight that fucking war all over again? Hows about we agree to grant a general amnesty to both sides in future debates and focus on the merits of the claims, not what someone did 40 years ago when the country was being torn apart by the Vietnam War.

I’m not saying we should forget the lessons we learned back then, but lets not keep fighting the same battles over and over and over again.

75

[QUOTE=magellan01]
As I’ve shared on these boards many times, I did not vote for GWBush. Either time. I think the day he was anointed the Republican candidate was a sad day.
[/QUOTE]

okay, I hadn’t seen those posts. Glad to hear it.

I saw some of that as well. That’s part of why I was disappointed that he was selected. I think career politics distorts people. I think it’s a little one sided to think his* only* reason for going was to further his political career. To go and serve while thinking “this may be helpful later” is human not dishonorable. Kerry was far from the only vet who returned to protest the war and it seems equally one sided to think his only reason for doing so was also to promote himself.
If we’re waiting for politicians who are all noble and true without giving thought to their career we’ll die waiting.

As I said, he handled it badly. If he had simply said, when I served in combat, and when I protested the war I was doing what I felt was right and trying to serve my country as best I knew how. Doing that he could have acknowledged that he received purple hearts and why and how he gave them up. I thought the whole Vietnam thing was stressed too much. It’s fine to make people aware that he served while GWB didn’t, but return to the issues at hand.

Why should he?

I have a hard time understanding how anybody can think that considering the last few years. I can’t see Kerry as more of a facade than Bush given the evidence. I can understand somebody deciding they couldn’t vote for either man, even if I don’t agree. The choice between something that may have been questionable decades ago vs a current tragic war built on lies seemed an easy choice to me.

That’s assuming that was his only goal. I agree that promoting false atrocities as fact is a bad thing but the truth is that passionate people on both sides of any issue are prone to accept things that support their position without enough fact checking. That’s not an excuse. If the larger points, atrocities were being committed , the war was built on lies and needed to be stopped, were true, then his efforts were to save his fellow soldiers rather than betray them.
The tragedy of Vietnam was that we had no enemy over there. How could pointing out that fact to end the war being giving comfort to an enemy that didn’t exist?

I think we’ve grown in the sense that we can honor the service of our troops and still question the reason’s why we’re in Iraq. We weren’t as able to do that in the Vietnam era. I maintain that someone who actually risked his life there along with other vets, has every right to protest what he believes is an unjust war that is costing American lives that needn’t be lost. Hell, even someone who isn’t a vet has that right.
Day has a right to voice his opinions about Kerry but if atrocities were committed in Vietnam then his implication that Kerry’s testimony had no substance was itself a lie. His painting of the Vietnam communists as our enemy is also pretty dam questionable. His assertion that JK contributed to American deaths by trying to end the war is delusional. Even assuming he was sincere {and we can’t be sure of that} he allowed himself and his bitter opinions to be used as a political tool to divert attention from the current tragic war and the other issues. I don’t see anything honorable in that.

76

[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil]
Dude, when you’re in a combat zone and share the kind of intimacy of near death experiences that they and I have, it just isn’t anything you really talk about.

Ever.
[/QUOTE]

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, huh? :dubious:

77

[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
Hardly. Even if you think what Kerry did was just wonderful, you have to allow that other people, even some quite good people, might not feel that way.

We have a system here that allows for these kinds of disagreements.
[/QUOTE]

I think the evidence is pretty strong that Vietnam was a tragic mistake that cost hundreds of thousands of lives. That means those who worked to end it and ultimately succeeded saved lives and deserve our thanks.
Of course people can disagree and that can’t be helped. I’d be willing to look at any evidence that leaving Vietnam was a mistake.

Thanked for helping to end the war and saving lives in the process. Why is that going too far?

Never claimed this . Irrelevant.

78

[QUOTE=John Mace]
Do we have to fight that fucking war all over again? Hows about we agree to grant a general amnesty to both sides in future debates and focus on the merits of the claims, not what someone did 40 years ago when the country was being torn apart by the Vietnam War.

I’m not saying we should forget the lessons we learned back then, but lets not keep fighting the same battles over and over and over again.
[/QUOTE]

In light of present events, what lessons would you say we’ve learned?

79

[QUOTE=magellan01]
His goal might have been commendable, but there are honorable ways to do things and dishonorable. He chose the latter.
[/QUOTE]

If by dishonorable you mean he believed and repeated stories he heard of atrocities without fact checking them, I think dishonorable is far to strong. If he repeated stories as fact that he knew were false then I’d agree.

80

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
In light of present events, what lessons would you say we’ve learned?
[/QUOTE]

Some of us learned a few lessons. Others not so much.