McCain

[Martlet]

"essentially" endorsed. HAHAHAHA.

 

Kerry "essentially" committed war crimes.

 

Oh wait, he ADMITTED to being a war criminal. He's a piece of shit too, right?

[j_b]

http://www.angelfire.com/co/COMMONSENSE/vietnam.html

 

"While a horrific example of a Vietnam war crime, the My Lai massacre was not unique. It fit a long pattern of indiscriminate violence against civilians that had marred U.S. participation in the Vietnam War from its earliest days when Americans acted primarily as advisers.

 

In 1963, Capt. Colin Powell was one of those advisers, serving a first tour with a South Vietnamese army unit. Powell's detachment sought to discourage support for the Viet Cong by torching villages throughout the A Shau Valley. While other U.S. advisers protested this countrywide strategy as brutal and counter-productive, Powell defended the "drain-the-sea" approach then -- and continued that defense in his 1995 memoirs, My American Journey."

 

[...]

 

"But a test soon confronted Maj. Powell. A letter had been written by a young specialist fourth class named Tom Glen, who had served in an Americal mortar platoon and was nearing the end of his Army tour. In a letter to Gen. Creighton Abrams, the commander of all U.S. forces in Vietnam, Glen accused the Americal division of routine brutality against civilians. Glen's letter was forwarded to the Americal headquarters at Chu Lai where it landed on Maj. Powell's desk.

 

"The average GI's attitude toward and treatment of the Vietnamese people all too often is a complete denial of all our country is attempting to accomplish in the realm of human relations," Glen wrote. "Far beyond merely dismissing the Vietnamese as 'slopes' or 'gooks,' in both deed and thought, too many American soldiers seem to discount their very humanity; and with this attitude inflict upon the Vietnamese citizenry humiliations, both psychological and physical, that can have only a debilitating effect upon efforts to unify the people in loyalty to the Saigon government, particularly when such acts are carried out at unit levels and thereby acquire the aspect of sanctioned policy."

 

[...]

 

"Glen's letter echoed some of the complaints voiced by early advisers, such as Col. John Paul Vann, who protested the self-defeating strategy of treating Vietnamese civilians as the enemy. In 1995, when we questioned Glen about his letter, he said he had heard second-hand about the My Lai massacre, though he did not mention it specifically. The massacre was just one part of the abusive pattern that had become routine in the division, he said."

 

[...]

 

"There may be isolated cases of mistreatment of civilians and POWs," Powell wrote in 1968. But "this by no means reflects the general attitude throughout the Division." Indeed, Powell's memo faulted Glen for not complaining earlier and for failing to be more specific in his letter.

 

Powell reported back exactly what his superiors wanted to hear. "In direct refutation of this [Glen's] portrayal," Powell concluded, "is the fact that relations between Americal soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent."

 

Powell's findings, of course, were false. But it would take another Americal hero, an infantryman named Ron Ridenhour, to piece together the truth about the atrocity at My Lai. After returning to the United States, Ridenhour interviewed Americal comrades who had participated in the massacre.

 

[...]

 

"Powell did include, however, a troubling recollection that belied his 1968 official denial of Glen's allegation that American soldiers "without provocation or justification shoot at the people themselves." After mentioning the My Lai massacre in My American Journey, Powell penned a partial justification of the Americal's brutality. In a chilling passage, Powell explained the routine practice of murdering unarmed male Vietnamese.

 

"I recall a phrase we used in the field, MAM, for military-age male," Powell wrote. "If a helo spotted a peasant in black pajamas who looked remotely suspicious, a possible MAM, the pilot would circle and fire in front of him. If he moved, his movement was judged evidence of hostile intent, and the next burst was not in front, but at him. Brutal? Maybe so. But an able battalion commander with whom I had served at Gelnhausen (West Germany), Lt. Col. Walter Pritchard, was killed by enemy sniper fire while observing MAMs from a helicopter. And Pritchard was only one of many. The kill-or-be-killed nature of combat tends to dull fine perceptions of right and wrong."

 

While it's certainly true that combat is brutal, mowing down unarmed civilians is not combat. It is, in fact, a war crime. Neither can the combat death of a fellow soldier be cited as an excuse to murder civilians. Disturbingly, that was precisely the rationalization that the My Lai killers cited in their own defense."

[Martlet]

Excellent rant. Was there a point to it?

[gotterdamerung]

I believe the play J_B was trying to make was the "Hindsight is 20/20 card". Combat is a brutal business, and when your life is on the line the instinct to stay alive is all consuming.

[Martlet]

I believe the play J_B was trying to make was the "Hindsight is 20/20 card". Combat is a brutal business, and when your life is on the line the instinct to stay alive is all consuming.

 

Ahhh. I'll agree with that.

[crazyjizzy]

Dear Young Republican Preppie Piece of Shit Martlet.

 

Get your facts straight; it was Bob Kerry, of Nebraska, who admitted to probable war crimes.

 

During the Iran-Irag war, the Republican administrations were in an internal see-saw battle over who to support. Iraq, as a bullwark to Islamic fundementalism encroaching on the Saudi's, or Iran, due to the fact that Iraq was viewed as Isreal's greatest external enemy? Well, they armed both! When Iraq used chemical weapons on the Iranians, Iran complained to the US, and the US, lead by Colin Powell, turned a deaf ear.

[Martlet]

Dear Young Republican Preppie Piece of Shit Martlet.

 

Get your facts straight; it was Bob Kerry, of Nebraska, who admitted to probable war crimes.

 

 

Dear crazyjz,

 

I've heard they don't teach much history in the obligatory GED classes, so I'll help you out. While Bob Kerrey may very well be a war criminal, I was referring to JOHN KERRY and had my facts straight.

 

 

 

"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 calibre 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 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 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.

 

-- John Kerry, on NBC's "Meet the Press" April 18, 1971"

 

 

Feel free to leave your apology right here in this thread.

[gotterdamerung]

I believe this was after the fact that Shi'a radicals stormed the American embassy in Tehran and took 52 Americans hostage for over a year (444 days). The Whitehouse diplomatic approach to Iran's treatment of those 52 people could be characterized as "Fuck me? No fuck you". The great majority of Americans living during that time felt like Iran was simply getting what they had coming to them.

[Fairweather]

Dear Young Republican Preppie Piece of Shit Martlet.

 

Get your facts straight; it was Bob Kerry, of Nebraska, who admitted to probable war crimes.

 

During the Iran-Irag war, the Republican administrations were in an internal see-saw battle over who to support. Iraq, as a bullwark to Islamic fundementalism encroaching on the Saudi's, or Iran, due to the fact that Iraq was viewed as Isreal's greatest external enemy? Well, they armed both! When Iraq used chemical weapons on the Iranians, Iran complained to the US, and the US, lead by Colin Powell, turned a deaf ear.

 

Actually, CrazyJ,

 

John Kerry has admitted to some "war crimes" too, including over a dozed civilians killed (under his command) and a mother/infant and 12 year old boy. ...But I'm sure you'll be able to overlook this in November, as driven as you are by your hatred of Bush.

 

Bob Kerry has admitted to much brutality as well.

 

 

I don't condemn either of them for what they did in Vietnam. One, however, is a hypocrite and one is not.

 

It would appear, CrazyJ, it is you who does not have your facts straight.

[Double_E]

one thing's fer damn sure.. if Kerry picked McCain for a running mate he'd have a guaranteed ticket to the White House.

I don't think he needs to tho; I think things are looking bleaker and bleaker for Dubya.

[Martlet]

one thing's fer damn sure.. if Kerry picked McCain for a running mate he'd have a guaranteed ticket to the White House.

I don't think he needs to tho; I think things are looking bleaker and bleaker for Dubya.

 

Fortunately, they're still looking better for GWB than they are for Hanoi John.

[Squid]

keep telling yourself that.

[AlpineK]

Martlet sure has a lot of oppinions for a guy with 28 posts.

[Squid]

Actually, I think he's being pretty reserved for a guy who knows everything.

[Martlet]

It only appears I know everything, since you're used to reading OpEd posts based on false information. You finally get someone in here that calls you on it and you whine like a bunch of little girls.

 

Liberals sure are amusing.

[EWolfe]

Actually, I think he's being pretty reserved for a guy who knows everything.

 

You're killin' me, Squid.

 

**you are ignoring this conservative**

 

[AlpineK]

It only appears I know everything, since you're used to reading OpEd posts based on false information. You finally get someone in here that calls you on it and you whine like a bunch of little girls.

 

Liberals sure are amusing.

 

You know as much as anyone could possibly know with their head stuck so far up their ass that they can see their stomach.

[mattp]

Martlet, your blind ignorance and unwillingness to read the news is showing pretty badly here. You accuse the liberal moonbots of basing their opinions on untruths, yet the big lies about this war -- all of them -- have come from the BUSH ADMINISTRATION and CONSERVATIVE PRESS. It wasn't the liberals who said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and we might find the proof of this is the form of a mushroom cloud over Washington. It wasn't the liberals who said Saddam was linked to the 911 attacks. It wasn't the liberals who said the Iraqi people were going to greet us with open arms and we wouldn't need a strong military presence to keep the peace after the mission was accomplished. Get a grip.

[lummox]

Martlet, your blind ignorance and unwillingness to read the news is showing pretty badly here. You accuse the liberal moonbots of basing their opinions on untruths, yet the big lies about this war -- all of them -- have come from the BUSH ADMINISTRATION and CONSERVATIVE PRESS. It wasn't the liberals who said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and we might find the proof of this is the form of a mushroom cloud over Washington. It wasn't the liberals who said Saddam was linked to the 911 attacks. It wasn't the liberals who said the Iraqi people were going to greet us with open arms and we wouldn't need a strong military presence to keep the peace after the mission was accomplished. Get a grip.

translation: 'jane you ignorant slut. . . '

[markinore]

It only appears I know everything, since you're used to reading OpEd posts based on false information.

 

TRUE THINGS BUSH TOLD US ABOUT IRAQ

1) Saddam is an asshole.

 

FALSE THINGS BUSH TOLD US ABOUT IRAQ

1) Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.

2) Saddam tried to buy uranium to make nuclear weapons.

3) Iraq was involved with 9/11.

3) The Iraqis would welcome our troops with open arms.

4) We have enough soldiers to control the country; most of them will be returning when their tour of duty is over.

5) All those who oppose our troops are either foreign terrorists or members of Saddam's Baathist party.

6) After Saddam is overthrown, no Iraqi need fear torture or rape in his prisons.

 

Anything above you want to "call me on," Martlet?

[catbirdseat]

Martlet: DustinB's alter ego.

[thrutch]

Fortunately, they're still looking better for GWB than they are for Hanoi John.

 

Things are not looking too good for Bush, even his friend's are starting to be rattled by his ineffectiveness.

[chucK]

From the above link

 

Robert Kagan, a neoconservative supporter of the Iraq war, wrote: "All but the most blindly devoted Bush supporters can see that Bush administration officials have no clue about what to do in Iraq tomorrow, much less a month from now."

[Martlet]

Martlet, your blind ignorance and unwillingness to read the news is showing pretty badly here. You accuse the liberal moonbots of basing their opinions on untruths, yet the big lies about this war -- all of them -- have come from the BUSH ADMINISTRATION and CONSERVATIVE PRESS. It wasn't the liberals who said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and we might find the proof of this is the form of a mushroom cloud over Washington. It wasn't the liberals who said Saddam was linked to the 911 attacks. It wasn't the liberals who said the Iraqi people were going to greet us with open arms and we wouldn't need a strong military presence to keep the peace after the mission was accomplished. Get a grip.

 

Speaking of blind ignorance and unwillingness to read the news, or speaking of liberals claiming Saddam has WMD, here are some interesting quotes:

 

""The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998"

 

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

 

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

 

Bah, go read the rest yourself here.

 

TRUE THINGS BUSH TOLD US ABOUT IRAQ

1) Saddam is an asshole.

 

FALSE THINGS BUSH TOLD US ABOUT IRAQ

1) Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.

2) Saddam tried to buy uranium to make nuclear weapons.

3) Iraq was involved with 9/11.

3) The Iraqis would welcome our troops with open arms.

4) We have enough soldiers to control the country; most of them will be returning when their tour of duty is over.

5) All those who oppose our troops are either foreign terrorists or members of Saddam's Baathist party.

6) After Saddam is overthrown, no Iraqi need fear torture or rape in his prisons.

 

Anything above you want to "call me on," Martlet?

 

Nope, markinore, but would you mind adding the other names to your list of folks who claimed that? You can get some of them from the link I posted above.

 

Do any of you moonbats actually follow politics, or do you just cut and paste from moveon?

[markinore]

You are correct, Martlet, that the Clinton family, Daschle, and other Democratic officials accepted at face value some of the same incorrect intelligence regarding WMD. I don't think you can show that they supported the 9/11-Iraq connection that Bush tried to establish. Nor do I think you can attribute to them the unrealistic expectations for the invasion and occupation that Bush sold to us.

 

If your point is that Clinton et al. bear some responsibility for creating the false impression that Iraq was a direct threat to this country, your point is well taken. All government officials who did not stand up against the invasion, including Kerry, bear some responsibility. I think we would all agree, however, that Bush made the final decision and bears the greatest blame/credit for what has happened and what will happen in the future.

 

Our country now has to decide whether to make matters worse but continuing the policies that have already failed so miserably.