John Kerry On

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@11 May 2004 - 20:54
This thread was about showing again how much of a hypocrite he really is. He wants someone to resign from their position in office for violating the Geneva Convention, but he openly admits to violating them himself.

a politician with hypocritical tendencies? or a vietnam vet who claims that he was ordered to use excessive, inhumane force against civilians during that war? the devil you say!

john kerry's qualifications don't make that particular criticism of bush, rumsfeld, etc any less valid. almost every other person in the world could say the exact same thing that kerry has said about the bush administration, and you can't brush that off with "well, the bush administration should just be let off the hook since you're all a bunch of baby-killing, village-burning hypocrites."

[Alex H]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@12 May 2004 - 04:54
Alex do a search on this forum for anti Bush threads and see how many come up. People on here can bash away all they want on the President but I post a thread about Kerry and I'm trying to make him look bad. I bet that you can find at whole boat load of threads bashing the President, but see how many you can find about Kerry.

This thread was about showing again how much of a hypocrite he really is. He wants someone to resign from their position in office for violating the Geneva Convention, but he openly admits to violating them himself.

Thank you Hank, I am aware of how many Bush bashing threads there are on this board. I contribute to many of them myself.

However, the point you make about Kerry not being able to criticize the Bush administration for its lack of enforcing the Geneva Conventions is still a bulshit one.

As you did not provide a link or reference to Kerry's quotation in your original post, I am (along with everyone else) unable to tell if this comment was actually made in reference to the Geneva Conventions or if was Kerry telling an old war story. I have no context in which to base that remark, so I will continue to defend my point, which also has no real base to work from. Supply us with a link to where you got the remark an we can discuss this intelligently.

Again, if John Kerry violated the Geneva Convention it was because he was obeying orders. If Rumsfeld violated the Geneva Convention is was because he was giving the orders. As it was established at Nuremburg "only obeying orders" is not an excuse. "I gave the order", isn't an excuse, it is an admission.

The U.S. Government doesn't really give a shit about the Geneva Conventions anyway. If they did, they would do something like apologizing to the people of Vietnam for what soldiers like Kerry did over there.

[BigBank_Hank]

Ok here's the link if you want to read the mess for yourself. I just love watching him talk in circles trying to defend things like this.

Story Here

[Biggles]

I am actually quite impressed that Hank agrees dodging fighting in Vietnam was a noble and humane thing to do. That the war was riddled with crimes and that it sucked Americans into commiting crimes of the very worst sort on a huge scale.

I am also gratified that my reservations from the early 70s were not misplaced. :-"

[Rat Faced]

(Videotape, MEET THE PRESS, April 18, 1971):

MR. KERRY (Vietnam Veterans Against the War):  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-caliber 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 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.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT:  You committed atrocities.

SEN. KERRY:  Where did all that dark hair go, Tim?  That's a big question for me.  You know, I
thought a lot, for a long time, about that period of time, the things we said, and I think the word is a bad word.  I think it's an inappropriate word.  I mean, if you wanted to ask me have you ever made mistakes in your life, sure.  I think some of the language that I used was a language that reflected an anger.  It was honest, but it was in anger, it was a little bit excessive.

MR. RUSSERT:  You used the word "war criminals."

SEN. KERRY:  Well, let me just finish.  Let me must finish.  It was, I think, a reflection of the kind of times we found ourselves in and I don't like it when I hear it today.  I don't like it, but I want you to notice that at the end, I wasn't talking about the soldiers and the soldiers' blame, and my great regret is, I hope no soldier--I mean, I think some soldiers were angry at me for that, and I understand that and I regret that, because I love them.  But the words were honest but on the other hand, they were a little bit over the top.  And I think that there were breaches of the Geneva Conventions.  There were policies in place that were not acceptable according to the laws of warfare, and everybody knows that.  I mean, books have chronicled that, so I'm not going to walk away from that.  But I wish I had found a way to say it in a less abrasive way.

I think the small snap quoted earlier, was indeed, taken out of context.

I believe he was trying to get the people responsible for giving the orders that made so many commit crimes, put on the Dock...

A noble effort, in my opinion.... although it would have been nobler (but much harder) to just refuse to follow those orders in the 1st place.

[BigBank_Hank]

You may see it as taking it out of context but it still doesn't change what he did. The other paragraphs are just him trying to cover his ass

MR. RUSSERT:  You committed atrocities.

SEN. KERRY:  Where did all that dark hair go, Tim?  That's a big question for me.  You know, I
thought a lot, for a long time, about that period of time, the things we said, and I think the word is a bad word.  I think it's an inappropriate word

I wouldn't be making light of this issue if Kerry wouldn't keep reminding us that he served in Vietnam. He can't do a radio or TV commercial without mention that. That's all he's got to run on.

[Rat Faced]

Well if you get Hugh Thompson, a real hero in my opinion, to run... i'll support him.


The point is though that Kerry did actually serve out there, getting shot at etc etc

Unlike some, that didnt, but still claim they're "vets"....



I dont know why any of this is a big deal in the USA.

In the UK we dont give a crap whether someone was in the forces or not, and as such, its never mentioned by politicians.

Maybe its a Gung Ho mentality or something over there, i dunno..... I just think its all weird

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@12 May 2004 - 19:53
Well if you get Hugh Thompson, a real hero in my opinion, to run... i'll support him.


The point is though that Kerry did actually serve out there, getting shot at etc etc

Unlike some, that didnt, but still claim they're "vets"....



I dont know why any of this is a big deal in the USA.

In the UK we dont give a crap whether someone was in the forces or not, and as such, its never mentioned by politicians.

Maybe its a Gung Ho mentality or something over there, i dunno..... I just think its all weird

I somewhat agree.

Just because you served, it doesn't make you a good person.

[BigBank_Hank]

The point is though that Kerry did actually serve out there, getting shot at etc etc

So I guess that gives him the right to break as many rules as he wants. He torches villages and mows down people with the 50 cal. but that's ok.

I dont know why any of this is a big deal in the USA.

It wouldn't be if he wouldn't keep on ramming it down our throats that he's a Vietnam vet. Kerry is the one who brought the whole issue of military service out. So now when he gets hammered on it he keeps saying that its a non issue.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@13 May 2004 - 00:09
It wouldn't be if he wouldn't keep on ramming it down our throats that he's a Vietnam vet. Kerry is the one who brought the whole issue of military service out. So now when he gets hammered on it he keeps saying that its a non issue.

Forgive me if im wrong...

But i sort of got the impression that it had been an issue that was never cleared up since Bush ran for Governor of Texas.

You really cant blame Kerry that far back.


How something like this becomes an issue in the 1st place, is what confuses the rest of the world...