Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: Phred]
    #2533779 -

So you (like luvdemshrooms) are wedded to the "best of a bad lot" voting strategy. Fair enough.

As a pragmatist I'm not wedded to any strategy.  You see, that's what we pragmatists do: we change our strategy to adapt to the situation.  It forces us actually to think rather than take a cookie-cutter approach to every problem.

In this case we have a very tight election race in which one of the candidates, George W. Bush, is a person who failed the country disastrously in terms of national defense, a person who (I personally believe) knowingly lied to the American people about the justification for going to war, a person who wants to tamper with the US Constitution in order to enshrine discrimination into that document and who otherwise ignores the Constitution whenever it suits him, a person who makes sport out of destroying the environment, and a person who's also no great shakes when it comes to the economy either.  I personally believe that he has committed acts that count as high crimes and misdemeanors and besides that isn't even competent to hold the job.

So yes, I'm willing to take drastic measures to remove this man from office, and that includes voting for a man who did what practically every other US soldier on the ground did 35 years ago.

Speaking of which, I don't really see you starting any threads around here about how great Gary Nolan is.  What I do see you doing is smearing Kerry every chance you get and rushing to Bush's defense whenever there is a new revelation about his dishonesty or incompetence.  It's clear that you would prefer Bush between the two, and your actions, as opposed to your words, belie a "best of bad lot" strategy just as real as my own.

So if Al Gore had been sworn in as president in January of 2001 rather than Bush, and 9/11 had happened anyway, you would be voting against Gore this time around? Your voting decision for the 2004 election was determined in late 2001? Fair enough.

Probably.  If he had an otherwise sterling record as President I would have to think about it.  If he had the dismal record of dishonesty and incompetence that marks Bush, I would be making large donations and volunteering my time for his Republican challenger.

This is what you don't seem to understand: not everybody is as dogmatic and as ideologically rigid as you are.  Harry Truman was a Democrat, yet I believe his handling of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was an atrocity and that he should have been tried for crimes against humanity.  I believe that Eisenhower, a Republican, was a very shrewd politician who understood that what the American people needed most after the traumas of WWII and Korea was eight years of blandness and boredom; he also did us many great services such as building the federal highway network and identifying the military-industrial complex.  In the present day, Tony Blair is Labour but I believe he is just as bad as Bush and I hope he loses his job, even it means that the Tories take power in Britain.

Oh, please. You mean to tell me you never caught any of Kerry's widely-reported remarks about the threat of terrorism being exaggerated? Or about terrorism being a law enforcement issue? Or about how the president of the US should be subservient to the UN -- meaning of course France and Germany?

Show me direct quotes--I'm not interested in your highly, shall we say, "colorful" paraphrases.  Kerry believes that the war on terror cannot be won without coordination of intelligence and solidarity among the countries of the West.  It also cannot be won if huge amounts of resources are being diverted to non-threats like Iraq.  Entering Afghanistan to remove the Taliban was justified, and no, France and Germany didn't oppose that--they actually contributed men and materiel.  Any sitting US President, including Kerry, would have done it even if they had opposed it.

If only the president of the United States had the same luxury. Unfortunately, in the real world (as you are so found of saying) the prez is sworn to defend his constituents. Sometimes that means making decisions which might involve the deaths of non-combatants outside the borders of the United States, as past US presidents have discovered.

Yes, sometimes it does.  But sexing up intelligence and then killing thousands upon thousands of non-combatant civilians for an action that not only doesn't make his constituents safer but also arguably makes his constituents less safe is a clear violation of that oath.

It certainly is not going to happen if Kerry subjugates himself (and all his constituents) to the whims of the UN, that's for sure. To even be in a position where the possibility of war crimes exists, one must first be willing to fight back.

So before you were implying that he's a ravenously blood-thirsty war criminal who knowingly flouts international law to get his jollies off killing women and children, so we shouldn't vote for him.  And now he's the tame lapdog of a supposedly pacifist international organization who won't even retaliate against an attack or take any measures to protect US citizens, so we shouldn't vote for him. :lol:

A good general rule of thumb is that if somebody resorts to two diametrically opposite caricatures in order to discredit somebody, the person doing the discrediting is grasping at straws--i.e., is full of it.

Even the Bush campaign is smart enough not to resort to this whole "war criminal" line of attack--they realize that it would make their "soft on defense" line of attack look like a joke.  They furthermore realize that if they tried to paint Kerry as a war criminal, the Vietnam vets of this country would slam them down so hard and so fast it would blow the entire "House of Rove" off its foundations.  McCain, a good friend of Kerry, would probably be so pissed off that he would renounce the GOP and join Kerry as his running mate, which would effectively seal the coffin on Bush's re-election hopes.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: Phred]
    #2534506 -

the only cabinet-level member of the Bush administration with combat experience is Colin Powell, who was the most moderate voice in the administration...Perhaps you and Xochitl should open a separate thread to further discuss your differing opinions on the character of Colin Powell.


There is no difference in infidel and xochitl's positions and it is incredibly disingenous to suggest there is. Colin Powell is the only cabinet-level member of the Bush admin with combat experience and was the most moderate voice. Xochitl valid comments about his character and history do not affect the accuracy of infidels point.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: EchoVortex]
    #2534516 -

Excellent post Echo  :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: Phred]
    #2534734 -

Quote:
I said: Post-World War II psychological training could not begin to prepare soliders -even officers- for the horrors of battle in Vietman. Such training cannot and will not. Humans are not robots nor Pavlovian dogs - even if you think they are.



Quote:
pinksharkmark said: The horrors of war are nothing new. Read some accounts of World War I or World War II or Korea or even the American Civil War. Viet Nam was nothing special in the horror department. It pales in comparison to the atrocities committed routinely in Africa.



...so what? Most of the GIs in Vietnam were not in World War I, World War II, Korea, and they certainly never battled in the Civil War or Africa. So how on Earth would they have personally gained battle wisdom from these theatres?

Quote:
Your basic premise seems to be that anyone placed in a war zone has the capacity to become a war criminal, and should not be blamed for it -- because he is in a war zone.



No it is not. Do not put words in my mouth.

When individuals are placed into combat, the fear and paranoia that they experience is tragic but understandable. If the individual does kill or injure an innocent, what matters to me is what happens next: I am interested in justice first and foremost, but if justice cannot be had, I am interested in a life-change/repentence.

Kerry came home and worked for peace.

Powell continued on his path of keeping his mouth shut, following orders, lying when honesty matters the most, and engaging in numerous acts against peace and prosperity for innocent people.

Got it now?

Quote:
The difference between what Kerry admits he did and what Calley was convicted of doing is one of numbers only.



Interesting enough, I personally knew Rusty Calley (through his son) when I lived in Georgia. He was a quiet man who now works as a jeweler. He has a loving family. He was still haunted by what happened in Mai Lai. Rusty paid his dues and has not built a career that continues to murder innocents - unlike other officers of his time. He had many harsh words for the military the rare times I got him to talk about what happened. He lended his material support for the protesters of the School of Americas (also known as the School of Assassins that terrorizes Latin America) at Ft. Bening - which is located in Columbus, GA where Calley lives with his family.

Quote:
As I mentioned earlier, I protested the war in Viet Nam.



well, that's too bad you've lost your ways.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: Phred]
    #2535078 -

Would that be the same Colin Powell "whose disgusting military and political career is not to be ignored"?
...
Perhaps you and Xochitl should open a separate thread to further discuss your differing opinions on the character of Colin Powell.

you have a real sneaky way of misrepresenting everything I say, but that's nothing new is it?
let me be clear: I am no fan of Colin Powell. I agree with Xochitl's opinion of him for the most part. I was merely pointing out the irony of the fact that the only real military man in the white house was the most moderate voice regarding the Iraq war. perhaps you missed that.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bush Mongers -- getting desperate [Re: Phred]
    #2535217 -

By his own admission, he is a war criminal. Who would know better than Kerry himself? The rationalizations of people on a bulletin board don't alter that fact. None of them served with Kerry.

like I said, Kerry was obviously playing politics when he said those things, much as you're doing now. He was using himself as an example to condemn an unjust war and reminding people of the horrors of war. he wasn't ACTUALLY admitting to be a war criminal. it's called political rhetoric. I don't think even the author of that article is ACTUALLY calling Kerry a war criminal, but you seemed to have taken this idea and really ran with it.

But yes, if an Iraq veteran admitted to being a war criminal after returning home, and later decided to run for office, I would remind people intending to vote for him of his self-confessed criminality.

what if he never ACTUALLY SAID he was a war criminial but instead said something like "I was a pilot and I knowingly dropped bombs on innocent civilians, which...
I find out later on, are contrary to the Hague and Geneva conventions and to the laws of warfare. So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the application of the Nuremberg Principles, is in fact guilty."

"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. . .ordered us. . .are war criminals."

and what if he said these things in order to protest what he saw as an unjust war and to make people think about the realities of war? what if he looked back on his actions with sadness and regret? and harbored resentment towards those men who lied and gave illegal orders and placed him in such a position to commit these acts?

would that make you think about war and it's effects on those who take part in it? would that make you think that perhaps the term "war criminal" is redundant? that war itself is a crime?

or would you completely miss the point and breathlessly scream WAR CRIMINAL!!!?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bush Mongers -- getting desperate [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2535420 -

would that make you think about war and it's effects on those who take part in it? would that make you think that perhaps the term "war criminal" is redundant? that war itself is a crime?

or would you completely miss the point and breathlessly scream WAR CRIMINAL!!!?

Apparently the latter of the two.

I hear, however, that screaming breathlessly is good exercise for the lungs.

I think we can safely count on pinky to hew closely to his one and only "talking point" and we will hear him repeat the words "war criminal" at least fifteen or twenty more times before this thread peters out.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: Phred]
    #2535797 -

Quote:
My point in mentioning you specifically is to highlight the hypocrisy of those here who have denigrated your strategy yet will be using it themselves.


It is quite funny. Ah, the hypocrisy.


Quote:
You have been subjected to a lot of ridicule for your stance by the same crowd who intend to do the same.



Ridicule is only effective when there is something to be ashamed of. It had no effect.


Fair enough though.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bush Mongers -- getting desperate [Re: Phred]
    #2536046 -

oh btw, saying someone is the most moderate member of the Bush administration really isn't saying much. if you were in the Bush administration, you'd be the most moderate member.


EchoVortex: I think we can safely count on pinky to hew closely to his one and only "talking point" and we will hear him repeat the words "war criminal" at least fifteen or twenty more times before this thread peters out.

maybe he thinks if he says it enough times people will start to believe it. must have got that one from the Bush school of persuasion.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2537700 -

Ridicule is only effective when there is something to be ashamed of. It had no effect.

For something having no effect you're incredibly touchy about it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: Phred]
    #2538009 -

"John Kerry -- war criminal"

For one it shows balls, that he can admit his wrongs.

2 who are you to judge his actions? Did you fight in veitnam? If you had would you have fallowed the geneva convention, or would you have done what your superior was telling you to do?

George Bush's draft doging may have been more honorable than the things Kerry did, but when has bush ever admitted bieng wrong? in his whole life. Find me a link.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: Xlea321]
    #2538159 -

Alex123 said:
Ridicule is only effective when there is something to be ashamed of. It had no effect.

For something having no effect you're incredibly touchy about it.


I'm sure you wish it were so, but alas, you're out of luck.... and wrong yet again.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: EchoVortex]
    #2540305 -

EchoVortex writes:

So yes, I'm willing to take drastic measures to remove this man from office, and that includes voting for a man who did what practically every other US soldier on the ground did 35 years ago.

"Practically every other US soldier on the ground"? Proof please. And no, the "Winter Soldiers" testimony doesn't count. That has been thoroughly discredited.

Did many US soldiers torch hooches? Yep. Did many US soldiers indulge in "mad minutes" and "free fire exercises"? Yep. Did "practically all" of them? Nope.

More germane, did "practically all" US officers do so? Nope. But Kerry admits he did.

Speaking of which, I don't really see you starting any threads around here about how great Gary Nolan is. What I do see you doing is smearing Kerry every chance you get and rushing to Bush's defense whenever there is a new revelation about his dishonesty or incompetence.

LOL. "Smearing Kerry" every chance I get? Believe me, there are tons of opportunities to reveal Kerry's nature I let slide. "Rushing to Bush's defense"? I have written here many times criticizing Bush. But to head off your attempted derailment of this thread, this thread is about Kerry.

It's clear that you would prefer Bush between the two...

I would. However, I still wouldn't vote for either of them. I'd vote Libertarian.

So before you were implying that he's a ravenously blood-thirsty war criminal who knowingly flouts international law to get his jollies off killing women and children...

No need to imply anything -- all I did was quote Kerry himself. As for "getting jollies", I have not the faintest inkling of his motives for choosing to act as he did -- just that he has said (repeatedly) he chose to do those things. It matters not a whit to me his motivations. What matters to me are his actions.

...so we shouldn't vote for him. And now he's the tame lapdog of a supposedly pacifist international organization who won't even retaliate against an attack or take any measures to protect US citizens, so we shouldn't vote for him.

Ah ... the "excluded middle" fallacy. I wouldn't vote for either a self-admitted war criminal or for a pacifist appeaser -- whether they are the same man or two different men. It is possible to be neither a war criminal nor an appeaser, you know.

A good general rule of thumb is that if somebody resorts to two diametrically opposite caricatures in order to discredit somebody, the person doing the discrediting is grasping at straws--i.e., is full of it.

Gee. You wouldn't be referring to those here who are convinced Bush is a stoopid evil genius, would you?

They furthermore realize that if they tried to paint Kerry as a war criminal...

No need to "paint" anything. Kerry is a self-admitted war criminal.

...the Vietnam vets of this country would slam them down so hard and so fast it would blow the entire "House of Rove" off its foundations.

Really? There are more than a few Viet Nam vets who have nothing but contempt for Kerry. It's just that you won't find their comments published at Znet or The Daily Kos.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2541485 -

infidelGOD writes:

you have a real sneaky way of misrepresenting everything I say, but that's nothing new is it?

Please explain to the readers here how directly cutting and pasting -- with no alterations whatsoever -- your opinion of Colin Powell is misrepresentation.

Thank you.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Bush Mongers -- getting desperate [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2541601 -

infidelGOD writes:

like I said, Kerry was obviously playing politics when he said those things, much as you're doing now.

Well, I certainly wouldn't want to be accused of misrepresenting your words, so let's see if we can slice away all the euphemisms here and speak plainly.

1) Did Kerry say he had participated in hooch burning and free fire exercises etc.? Yes or no?
2) Are these actions classified as war crimes? Yes or no?
3) Is someone who confesses to crimes a self-admitted criminal? Yes or no?

Now, I don't want to be misrepresenting your words, but when I try to translate "like I said, Kerry was obviously playing politics when he said those things," and "it's called political rhetoric", I get "Kerry lied about his actions in Viet Nam." Would that be a fair, euphemism-free rephrasing of your comment?

He was using himself as an example to condemn an unjust war and reminding people of the horrors of war.

Yes, we know that. The question I am trying to get you to answer is -- did Kerry lie about his actions in Viet Nam or didn't he? Because if he never did those things, then he's not a self-admitted war criminal, he's just a liar and a poser.

he wasn't ACTUALLY admitting to be a war criminal.

Is someone who confesses to committing crimes a self-admitted criminal? Yes or no?

"And I believe that the men who. . .ordered us. . .are war criminals."

Nuremburg established that the excuse "I was just following orders" is no excuse. Culpability may be shared between those issuing illegal orders and those carrying them out, but that's as far as it goes.

and what if he said these things in order to protest what he saw as an unjust war and to make people think about the realities of war?

Neither you nor I know whether Kerry actually did those things, so we have no way of knowing whether he is an honest-to-goodness war criminal or just a make-believe war criminal. But I am interested in your personal opinion -- do you personally believe he did those things or do you personally believe he lied about doing those things?

or would you completely miss the point and breathlessly scream WAR CRIMINAL!!!?

I'm doing no breathless screaming here. I posted quotes from John F Kerry confessing to war crimes. It is of course a possibity he lied about doing those things -- as I point out elsewhere in this thread, most American officers who served in Viet Nam committed no war crimes, so it is entirely possible (statistically even probable) that Kerry also committed none. I admit it would be a relief to know the Democratic presidential contender is not an actual war criminal but merely a self-confessed war criminal "wannabe".

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: Phred]
    #2541852 -

- Post History Deleted Upon User's Request -

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: ]
    #2541855 -

Quote:
I don't have the stomach to waste my precious time arguing with whiny idiots who wouldn't know the light of day if they were basked in it.


Coming from the most ardent supporter of the Bush administration on this forum, I find your portrayal of the opposition to be laughable.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: Phred]
    #2541892 -

And no, the "Winter Soldiers" testimony doesn't count. That has been thoroughly discredited.

Discredited by whom? Certainly not by you, who instead of actually discrediting it just told us to do a web search. Sorry, not my job to make your points for you.

Here is a site with the testimony:
http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/Primary/Winter_Soldier/WS_entry.html

Please tell us which specific testimony has been discredited.

Ah ... the "excluded middle" fallacy. I wouldn't vote for either a self-admitted war criminal or for a pacifist appeaser -- whether they are the same man or two different men. It is possible to be neither a war criminal nor an appeaser, you know.

You have not demonstrated that Kerry would "appease" those of our enemies who pose a credible threat to the United States. Simply because one doesn't invade every single country run by a government that isn't friendly to our interests doesn't make one an appeaser.

Secondly, the commission of certain crimes at one point in life does not make one a criminal for all eternity--and this is particularly the case if the person who committed those crimes later realizes his mistake and then works tirelessly to bring an end to the policies that encouraged those crimes in the first place. Speaking of excluded middles, what do we call a President who launches unnecessary wars that put young soldiers in the position where they feel they have to commit war crimes just so they can feel safe from ambush? A "war crime facilitator"? This is happening in Iraq as we speak, and it will be years before we find out the true extent of it.

Obviously a President, in the glare of the public eye, is not in much of a position to commit war crimes himself. The question one must ask oneself as a voter is, which candidate will faciliate the fewest war crimes? A man who committed them at one time and then worked against them or one who is facilitating them right at this very moment?


Gee. You wouldn't be referring to those here who are convinced Bush is a stoopid evil genius, would you?

There is no contradiction between being stupid and evil. I don't recall anybody here ever referring to George W. Bush as a "genius."

Really? There are more than a few Viet Nam vets who have nothing but contempt for Kerry. It's just that you won't find their comments published at Znet or The Daily Kos.

I do not read the sites you just mentioned. I find it kind of odd that, instead of telling me where I can find the comments of those Vietnam vets, you instead tell me where I won't find them. I'm sure there are plenty of Vietnam vets who disagree with Kerry's policies or feel contempt for him personally, but I don't think you'll find many who will stand up in public and say "John Kerry is a war criminal and I'm not and that's the end of the story" and put their names behind the statement, because the people who were there know that it's not as cut-and-dried as that.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: EchoVortex]
    #2542081 -

what do we call a President who launches unnecessary wars

The Judgement of the International Court at Nuremberg declared: "To initiate a war of aggression. is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole".

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: John Kerry -- war criminal [Re: silversoul7]
    #2542679 -

Coming from the most ardent supporter of the Bush administration on this forum, I find your portrayal of the opposition to be laughable.

Strange. Last week you spent 4 pages insisting to me there wern't any Bush supporters in the forum.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* John Kerry's Speech
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Zahid 5,412 61 07/31/04 04:53 PM
by Ancalagon
* Why Americans Must Vote for John Kerry
( 1 2 3 all )		 Zahid 4,932 40 08/29/04 02:08 PM
by Zahid
* john kerry's record on civil liberties Anonymous 720 3 09/30/04 02:41 PM
by silversoul7
* John Kerry Admitting to his War Crimes .mp3
( 1 2 all )		 retread 2,431 29 08/24/04 09:44 PM
by z@z.com
* More Bullshit From John Kerry
( 1 2 all )		 Divided_Sky 2,664 21 10/08/04 12:19 PM
by silversoul7
* John Kerry's War Vote: Profiles in Political Calculation? Ancalagon 800 3 08/22/04 07:18 PM
by zappaisgod
* point about John Kerry vampirism 837 17 08/14/04 04:11 AM
by Zahid
* republicans support john kerry?? KingOftheThing 1,186 6 07/31/04 11:57 PM
by JesusChrist

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
8,094 topic views. 2 members, 89 guests and 30 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.033 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 18 queries.