So, military involvement only means boots on the ground to you, not sending munitions or funds to aid the troops, not advisors, which are really soldiers, with the deceptive name of advisors.
Kerry reverts to his roots
- Thread starter Big Money
- Start date
So, military involvement only means boots on the ground to you, not sending munitions or funds to aid the troops, not advisors, which are really soldiers, with the deceptive name of advisors.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
well there's a coincidence.....five years after Obama got elected the last American soldier left Iraq.....oh, wait......
maineman
Banned
FACT: dead GI's were still coming home from Nam when Ford was president. Their names are on the black wall. And I NEVER supported ANYONE who took us into Vietnam. I was too young to vote for Humphrey in '68 and I voted for McGovern in '72.
Originally Posted by maineman View Post
daily basis???
I don't believe that Kerry said atrocities occurred on a daily basis.
Ooops:
I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command....
https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html
daily basis???
I don't believe that Kerry said atrocities occurred on a daily basis.
Ooops:
I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command....
https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html
christiefan915
Catalyst
The hundreds of military bases located overseas, regime change, foreign aid, involvement in civil or tribal wars just to name a few. Now how about you providing some examples of foreign military bases in the US. And also the names of countries supplying aid to us while you're at it. And I don't mean random people sending aid after Katrina or other disasters.
Nobody's stopping other nations from doing what they want. And since when do we look to other countries to show us what to do? A lot of other nations and citizens believed we shouldn't invade Iraq but that didn't stop your Messiah.
How do you pick and choose who to help and who to ignore? The world is full of cruel and vicious rulers that we turn a blind eye to. Hell, we embrace some of them, the Saudi kings for example. Maybe you think we have to be the world's moral police, but there's no morality involved, it all boils down to money or resources.
Naive, take the blinders off.
reagan and Bush41 "permitted—and frequently encouraged—the flow of money, agricultural credits, dual-use technology, chemicals, and weapons to Iraq." Good grief, Detroit made Saddam an honorary citizen in the '80s. As long as we could use him to our ends, we liked him.
Cite any mention of Syria in Obama's campaign platform.
No one can make this statement with a straight face; it is incredibly false.
South Vietnam was created as part of the Imperialist ambitions of France. It was a Republic officially recognized by the international community in 1949. The Geneva Conference partitioned Vietnam into Communist North non-Communist South in 1954.
This occurred because the Communists established their base in Hanoi in 1949. The notion that the Communists would allow free and fair elections can only be expressed in a vacuum of the historic realities and facts about Communism; which is a ONE party brutal system of repression.
I'm quite certain you have totally forgotten what point you are trying to make or even if you have one.
Please clarify; are you desperately trying to assert that we became militarily involved in Vietnam before JFK or Johnson? If so, where is your proof?
Obama didn't sabotage the peace talks as Nixon did with Vietnam.
Your rants are desperatly searching for a point which I have no idea what it is you are trying to make here.
christiefan915
Catalyst
Let's see. After the fall of Saigon the country went communist. Now explain how US foreign policy was drastically changed because of it.
maineman
Banned
merely responding to your post. you claimed that Nixon ended the war when the wall is, in fact, filled with names who died after he left office. I merely pointed that out.
You claimed that I attacked Nixon while simultaneously supporting the democrats who got us INTO Vietnam. I merely pointed out the fallacy of that as well.
If you say stupid shit that you can't back up, you should expect folks to call you on it from time to time.
maineman
Banned
How about the little "60" on the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Ribbon? JFK didn't get into office until '61.
They were not taking prisioners of war, either, Bud told me they started giving troops R&R at base camps to encourage them to take prisioners of war instead of killing them.
Soldiers are taught to dehumanize the enemy, Bud said emotions ran high especially when the VC were mutilating their soldiers, you didn't think Genieva Convention, you thought only revenge.
It was an ugly war, a lot of young soldiers and a type of warfare not experienced by our troops before. Terms like "fragging", "search and destroy" and "kill anything that moves" type of ugliness.
War is hell and Americans have no stomachs for all out war. It is why we shouldn't go to war.
How is this meddling? Do you even comprehend beyond the talking points you have been fed why those bases exist or why we were involved in regime change, foreign aid and civil wars?
I am amused by pacifists who think that US involvement in nation building or supporting allies against despotic regimes is somehow to be considered a bad thing. How is Democracy and representative Government a bad thing?
Pacifists also like to forget the efforts of the Former Soviet Union to implement Communism using force, murder and torture for their regime change.
What bases do we have overseas that were not the result of liberating and not at the request and invitation of the nations we have bases in? Answer; NONE.
What a laughably inept argument; why do other nations need foreign military bases here?
We do have extensive training facilities here for our allies. They just house with our military on existing bases; no need for separate facilities.
Is there a point here? My messiah? You’re arguments are laughably inept and filled with the empty rhetoric of Liberal Democrat talking points.
It doesn’t matter if “other” nations didn’t think we should invade Iraq; the FACT is we had the legal right to form a coalition to go into Iraq and enforce the resolutions Saddam refused to abide by.
Easy; those who are friendly and support democracy opposed to despots dictators and tyrants who wish to imprison their people and invade neighboring nations who are our allies.
I am not surprised that pacifists still cannot grasp the obvious; reality and the obvious are not their forte’.
This is false; we do not turn a blind eye to them. Our nation and those of free republics clearly recognize them. That doesn’t mean we have to do anything about them unless they attack us or our allies.
I am amused, you claim that the Saudi’s are cruel and vicious, yet their citizens are some of the most free and wealthy in the world. Yep, that is certainly cruel.
No one suggests we are the worlds “moral” police, which is a leftist talking point. Your claim that it boils down to money and resources is also false and cannot be supported by the historical facts. More proof you are more inclined to parrot leftist anti-American talking points than deal in truth or reality.
We spent billions repairing and assisting Europe after WWII. It was called the Martial Plan; the same can be said of Japan. We didn’t reap any economic or monetary gain from it. If anything, they became strong competitors to our own goods and services. That is just one example; there are thousands of others.
If the US does not stand up to brutal and repressive regimes bent on dominating their neighbors, then who?
This is an incredible example irony in the extreme sense of the word coming from someone with such an uninformed historic perspective and who parrots extreme leftist talking points.
That is a complete lie. Please substantiate it with some factual links.
This is a loony blogosphere myth that cannot be supported by credible facts; further proof that you selectively get your information from the loony leftist blogs and avoid reality and truth.
What does this have to do with anything?
Nixon sabotaged his own peace talks? Good lord; you are a patently uninformed partisan parrot aren't you?
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
??....we had peace talks?......what did Assad say?.....
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
interesting question, so I looked it up....
http://www.uniforms-4u.com/p-vietnam-campaign-military-anodized-medal-with-1960-date-bar-4465.aspx
Once again the leftist is historically challenged; South Vietnam didn't go communist, it was conquered after brutal fighting and after the Democrat controlled US Congress refused to abide by the agreement we made to the South Vietnamese which haunts us to this day.
After the conquest of the South through force, millions fled resulting in estimates of 200,000 to 400,000 deaths at sea.