Daily Kos: "How Quaint"

[CSM]

Comparing apples and oranges. If one does not believe in the war, and their taxes are being used to fight it, then they have every right to comment on it.

Great, I am glad you said that because that means that ANYONE can express their opinion on the war and whether they serve or not has no bearing on the subject! Even if they are for the war, believe in it strongly, in fact and in direct oposition to your opinion, they dont have to jump and join the military to validate that opinion any more than you have to send all your money to the US Government because you believe in higher taxes!

 

[Dr Grump]

Great, I am glad you said that because that means that ANYONE can express their opinion on the war and whether they serve or not has no bearing on the subject! Even if they are for the war, believe in it strongly, in fact and in direct oposition to your opinion, they dont have to jump and join the military to validate that opinion any more than you have to send all your money to the US Government because you believe in higher taxes!

Absolutely. You are right. What it does do, is add or detract from their credibility.

 

[CSM]

I think you overstate your case. With Murtha, all he is saying is if US troops have committed atrocities they should be brought to trial and there should be no cover up.

Unfortunately for your argument, the public record documents exactly what he said. He did indeed state categorically that the Marines had committed an atrocity and he called it murder. That is far different than your quote and assertion that he is merely calling for justice.

 

[Dr Grump]

Unfortunately for your argument, the public record documents exactly what he said. He did indeed state categorically that the Marines had committed an atrocity and he called it murder. That is far different than your quote and assertion that he is merely calling for justice.

I have just been accused on another thread of taking things literally. As far as Murtha is concerned I garnered from what he was saying that if certain things occurred poeple should be brought to justice. I don't disagree with him, you? I get the impression, no matter what he said, people on the right side of the political aisle would have given him crap. Nature of the beast and all...

 

[GotZoom]

And THAT is the reason the Swift Boat boys and their sponsors went after Kerry. His record in Viet Nam was honorable, what he did when he got back is what pissed them off. I agree with his second and third actions. Viet Nam posed no threat to the US and was a civil war. It's not like Diem et al were beacons of democracy. I guess if you believe the domino theory, that might have been a "reason". As for throwing their medals away, they earned 'em, and they had the right to do whatever they wanted with them. As for accusing others of atrocities, he should have backed them up. And if you are really after role models, what is Dubya doing in the WH. A former drunk and coke snorter. Are you holding him to his past or judging him on the here and now?

His actions when he returned were disrespectful and shameful to everyone who served; not just in Viet Nam, but even before.

His medals were symbolic of actions he took; and many of those actions represented saving lives. His throwing away those medals basically said that his actions were meaningless - as were the lives he saved.

Speaking of backing up accusations, where is that link proving President Bush's coke snorting?

 

[Dr Grump]

His actions when he returned were disrespectful and shameful to everyone who served; not just in Viet Nam, but even before.

His medals were symbolic of actions he took; and many of those actions represented saving lives. His throwing away those medals basically said that his actions were meaningless - as were the lives he saved.

Speaking of backing up accusations, where is that link proving President Bush's coke snorting?

Not everyone. A lot of folk disagreed with the war including a whole lot of veterans. And he had the right to throw away those medals. They were his and as far as he was concerned it was a waste of time. Again, a tonne of folk agreed with him.

I have absolutely no solid evidence Bush snorted coke. However, going on his previous behaviour prior to becoming sober, and the fact he refuses to confirm or deny said accusations (me? I'd be suing, and turning different shades of red in denial if I hadn't), on the weight of his character I choose to believe he did.

 

[CSM]

Absolutely. You are right. What it does do, is add or detract from their credibility.

Nope, not necessarily; anymore than someone who advocates income redistribution as a resolution to poverty yet does not give their money to those who make less than they is less credible. I can think of one or two very rich Democrats who fall into that category and I bet you can too. Does that make their opinion less credible? Is someone who has never been in contact with an illegal immigrant, doesn't live in a border state or has never travelled outside the country have any less of a credible opinion on immigration than someone who hasn't?

 

[jillian]

His actions when he returned were disrespectful and shameful to everyone who served; not just in Viet Nam, but even before.

His medals were symbolic of actions he took; and many of those actions represented saving lives. His throwing away those medals basically said that his actions were meaningless - as were the lives he saved.

Speaking of backing up accusations, where is that link proving President Bush's coke snorting?

His actions were in keeping with the times, with what he observed and with what he was told by others whom he believed, correctly or incorrectly.

 

[CSM]

I have just been accused on another thread of taking things literally. As far as Murtha is concerned I garnered from what he was saying that if certain things occurred poeple should be brought to justice. I don't disagree with him, you? I get the impression, no matter what he said, people on the right side of the political aisle would have given him crap. Nature of the beast and all...

My problem with Murtha is not the sentiment you just attributted to Murtha. My problem with him is that he is a political leader of this country and stated that the Marines are guilty of criminal acts before the investigation is complete and a trial is held. If those Marines are courtmartialed, they certainly have a valid claim to "undue command/political influence" which could pressure the convening authorites to find them guilty (regardless of the evidence) because the court thinks that is what the leaders/commanders want done.

 

[GotZoom]

Not everyone. A lot of folk disagreed with the war including a whole lot of veterans. And he had the right to throw away those medals. They were his and as far as he was concerned it was a waste of time. Again, a tonne of folk agreed with him.

I have absolutely no solid evidence Bush snorted coke. However, going on his previous behaviour prior to becoming sober, and the fact he refuses to confirm or deny said accusations (me? I'd be suing, and turning different shades of red in denial if I hadn't), on the weight of his character I choose to believe he did.

A lot of people have the right to do a lot of things. Does that mean it is correct? Respecful? Just because he is with a group of people doing the same thing, doesn't make it acceptable.

You have learned well from your Democratic teachings. You stated:

A former drunk and coke snorter.

I call you on it and all you can say is, "I have absolutely no solid evidence Bush snorted coke."

Sure didn't keep you from saying it now did it?

 

[CSM]

Not everyone. A lot of folk disagreed with the war including a whole lot of veterans. And he had the right to throw away those medals. They were his and as far as he was concerned it was a waste of time. Again, a tonne of folk agreed with him.

I have absolutely no solid evidence Bush snorted coke. However, going on his previous behaviour prior to becoming sober, and the fact he refuses to confirm or deny said accusations (me? I'd be suing, and turning different shades of red in denial if I hadn't), on the weight of his character I choose to believe he did.

I don't know that there were a "whole lot of veterans" who disagreed with the war. I was one of those who returned and even stayed in the military long after Kerry left it. I would say that a whole lot of publicity was given to the few who did disagree with the war.

I have absolutely no evidence that you as anindividual still soil your pants...however based on what was surely your behavior as a baby and prior to potty training, .... you get the drift....why the heck should you confirm that you are indeed potty trained? It is not worth the time or effort. By the way, it is obvious that your interpretation of the President's character is VERY different than the evaluation of the majority of people in this country.

 

[GotZoom]

His actions were in keeping with the times, with what he observed and with what he was told by others whom he believed, correctly or incorrectly.

I guess that makes it ok then.

I didn't know that someone as confident and strong as John Kerry would succumb so easily to peer-pressure.

 

[jillian]

I guess that makes it ok then.

I didn't know that someone as confident and strong as John Kerry would succumb so easily to peer-pressure.

I think he believed in what he did AT THE TIME. People change. They get older, more mature.

But that wasn't my point, at least, my point was that one can disagree with these men without disparaging their service. I think they deserve that, regardless of what their political beliefs.

 

[jillian]

I don't know that there were a "whole lot of veterans" who disagreed with the war. I was one of those who returned and even stayed in the military long after Kerry left it. I would say that a whole lot of publicity was given to the few who did disagree with the war.

I have absolutely no evidence that you as anindividual still soil your pants...however based on what was surely your behavior as a baby and prior to potty training, .... you get the drift....why the heck should you confirm that you are indeed potty trained? It is not worth the time or effort. By the way, it is obvious that your interpretation of the President's character is VERY different than the evaluation of the majority of people in this country.

I can only speak to the two Vietnam Vets I know, personally. They both felt about the war much like Kerry did. Both believe we shouldn't have been there and if we chose to be there, it should have been by use of overwhelming force, not the types of battles they faced which often consisted of retaking the same territory, with many troop losses, over and over again.

As for the evaluation of Bush's character, he was just found to be considered less trustworthy than Clinton by the American public.

 

[Dr Grump]

A lot of people have the right to do a lot of things. Does that mean it is correct? Respecful? Just because he is with a group of people doing the same thing, doesn't make it acceptable.
You have learned well from your Democratic teachings. You stated:
A former drunk and coke snorter.
I call you on it and all you can say is, "I have absolutely no solid evidence Bush snorted coke."
Sure didn't keep you from saying it now did it?

Depends who it is disrespectful to. Some saw it as the ultimate respect. A former soldier going against the grain and putting it on the line for what he believed in.

And I see you have learned well from your neocon teachings - cherrypick quotes. There was more to my statement than "I have no solid evidence". It is called circumstantial evidence and there are men on death row due to circumstantial evidence. Also, re Murtha. I see him as a former marine veteran who is pissed that some idiots may have besmeerched the marine corp. You see him as politiking. You have no evidence what his motives are. You choose to believe he is politiking as opposed to being genuinely pissed. Sure doesn't stop you from saying so does it....

 

[GotZoom]

I think he believed in what he did AT THE TIME. People change. They get older, more mature.

But that wasn't my point, at least, my point was that one can disagree with these men without disparaging their service. I think they deserve that, regardless of what their political beliefs.

Then what the hell was this:

".....recounted that soldiers had personally recollected stories of having "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads," of Vietnamese citizens and rampaging across Vietnam "[razing] villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan".

 

[Dr Grump]

Nope, not necessarily; anymore than someone who advocates income redistribution as a resolution to poverty yet does not give their money to those who make less than they is less credible. I can think of one or two very rich Democrats who fall into that category and I bet you can too. Does that make their opinion less credible? Is someone who has never been in contact with an illegal immigrant, doesn't live in a border state or has never travelled outside the country have any less of a credible opinion on immigration than someone who hasn't?

I concur re rich Democrats and they are hypocrites. As for the immigration issue that depends on how actively involved the anti-immigration people are. I'd at least expect them to get off their tushes and go down and make their feelings known...

 

[GotZoom]

Depends who it is disrespectful to. Some saw it as the ultimate respect. A former soldier going against the grain and putting it on the line for what he believed in.

And I see you have learned well from your neocon teachings - cherrypick quotes. There was more to my statement than "I have no solid evidence". It is called circumstantial evidence and there are men on death row due to circumstantial evidence. Also, re Murtha. I see him as a former marine veteran who is pissed that some idiots may have besmeerched the marine corp. You see him as politiking. You have no evidence what his motives are. You choose to believe he is politiking as opposed to being genuinely pissed. Sure doesn't stop you from saying so does it....

There you go again. You are sure Bush did coke but when pushed, you backpeddle and say you don't have evidence...you are just sure he did.

Now you are stating that I "see Murtha as politiking."

I want you to show me where I have said anything at all about Murtha.

 

[Dr Grump]

it is obvious that your interpretation of the President's character is VERY different than the evaluation of the majority of people in this country.

Going by his poll figures I'd say you are wrong. Even going by some conservatives on these boards, I'd say you are wrong.

 

[jillian]

Then what the hell was this:

".....recounted that soldiers had personally recollected stories of having "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads," of Vietnamese citizens and rampaging across Vietnam "[razing] villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan".

You're talking about the Winter Soldiers. See:

http://www.factcheck.org/article244.html

But again...to once again get back to what started this conversation, one can disagree with these men WITHOUT the personal attacks on their service. They at least stepped up to the plate.