Thursday, November 11, 2004

Requested

A friend of mine suggested that I add this to my blog. I've done so even though this blog is generally not a political site, nor a site for bashing anyone. I had to think about it for a short while due to the fact that I don't know in what context to present it. In the pretense of context I will offer this: This is from a message board in which I occasionally participate, it is a response to a person that I respect despite the fact that he holds opinions which are the polar opposite of my own.I have my opinions, you have yours; both are valid. Here it is:



I do not doubt that soldiers and others told Kerry of horrible things that had happened in Vietnam. I do not doubt that horrible things occurred in Vietnam. I do not doubt that Kerry felt quite badly about those things, nor that he felt compelled to do something about it.

I think it was best said by General Sherman (not too sure but you seem to be a quite capable "fact" checker) when he said "War is Hell." Do you think, or more appropriately did Kerry think that the things that happened in Vietnam were first times that they had ever occurred? Ask any veteran of the "Island Hopping Campaign" of WWII how things were on Bougainville. Ask a survivor of Iwo Jima. Ask one of the few that survived Guadacanal. Do it soon because they're dying at an alarming rate. Ask them what they saw. Ask them if they knew some of their fellow soldiers had necklaces made of ears. Ask them if they knew anyone collecting skulls of their enemies. Ask them if they knew anyone that participated in rape. Ask a survivor of almost any war.

War sucks. War creates criminals. War time situations are deplorable and loathsome. The only thing you can rely on in a war situation is your fellow warrior. John Kerry was a fellow warrior. And instead of keeping the faith with others he broke that faith. Whether compelled by a few shocked conscripts, a few disgusted officers or the "make love not war" crowd, he broke that faith. If you don't feel that way, go to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial and ask a few of the guys that work at the wall how they felt when they came home after the war, and were greeted not with "welcome back" signs, but with banners proclaiming them to be "baby killers." They weren't welcomed home with hugs and well wishes, but instead were spat upon. John Kerry was a poster child for the "free love" and "Hippie" movement. He broke the faith and turned upon his fellow soldiers, sailors and Marines.

Kerry destroyed his fellow warriors credibility when he lied about his experiences in Vietnam. He threw away their comradery and respect when he tossed his medals aside. He spat upon them when he testified about war crimes being the rule rather than the exception. He disrespected them when he united with "Hanoi Jane Fonda." And he disowned them when he met with Viet Cong leaders in Paris.

So talk to me about your "facts" and you'll read them one way and swear it's the correct interpretation and I'll read them my way and swear it's correct. But don't ever think for one minute that Kerry didn't break the faith of the men with whom he served. Because there, you'd be dead fucking wrong.

Comments are encouraged and will not be deleted unless they contain profanity or vulgarity.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

I guess then, in your very very wrong opinion, that I am "dead fucking wrong." You are the one who is "dead fucking wrong." John Kerry served his country. John Kerry got injured serving his country. John Kerry tried to help his country. That is a hell of a lot better than George Bush. George Bush did NOT serve his country. George Bush was afraid of being hurt to serve his country. All George Bush has done is get us into another war, taking our eyes off of Bin Laden, who is the one who attacked us, and onto Hussein, or shall I say, the oil that Hussein was in control of that Bush wanted. There was no reason for us to go after Hussein. He didn't have any ties to Al Quada. He didn't have any WMDs. He didn't even have resources to make WMDs. And while we were there, chasing this mirage, more countries gained WMDs, and Osama Bin Laden escaped. Not to mention us pissing off a bunch of other countries, like France, who should be our allies. But no, maybe you're right. Kerry did "break the faith of the men with whom he served." Yeah. Right.
-Suzannah

Edster said...

Ok Suzannah, I'll dissect and reply to your comment:

"I guess then, in your very very wrong opinion, that I am "dead fucking wrong." You are the one who is "dead fucking wrong." John Kerry served his country. John Kerry got injured serving his country. John Kerry tried to help his country."

John Kerry betrayed his fellow warriors. I clearly did not denigrate him by saying he did not fight for his country. So your point is moot there. And before your get upset about it, I too have served my country.


"That is a hell of a lot better than George Bush. George Bush did NOT serve his country. George Bush was afraid of being hurt to serve his country."

I don't disagree there. I didn't say a single thing about Bush not being a coward. In fact if you peruse my blog, you'll find that I have said "I hate George Bush."


All George Bush has done is get us into another war, taking our eyes off of Bin Laden, who is the one who attacked us, and onto Hussein, or shall I say, the oil that Hussein was in control of that Bush wanted.:

Two main countries buy Iraqi oil: Russia and France. This is because Iraqi oil is not high grade petroleum. In fact Iraq couldn't pay off it's debts to Kuwait because they couldn't sell their oil on the world market.


"There was no reason for us to go after Hussein. He didn't have any ties to Al Quada."

He didn't? I'm glad you told me. I guess we can just pack up all the troops now because you have informed the world that he didn't have any ties to Al Qaeda.

"He didn't have any WMDs."

Tell that to over 25,000 Kurdish men, women and children who died inhaling and being exposed to Iraqi poison gas. But I'm pretty sure that you're an American and historically Americans have a very very short memory, as well as less than a passing interest in world history.

"He didn't even have resources to make WMDs. And while we were there, chasing this mirage, more countries gained WMDs, and Osama Bin Laden escaped."

Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. We didn't have enough information to make a statement that said he did. I'll agree with that. But to say that he never had WMD or let me lose that acronym because acronyms make light of what we're really talking about. Weapons of Mass Destruction is really a misnomer, what we military types call them is NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) weapons. But to say that he never had NBC weapons is a lie.


"Not to mention us pissing off a bunch of other countries, like France, who should be our allies."

France? France? France doesn't care about America unless it's getting it's ass kicked. America has saved French asses twice in the last 60 years that I can casually think about: Vietnam and WWII. If anything those French snobs should be groveling at our feet because the next time they are attacked they'll come crying to the UN to get US (double entendre there) to save them.


"But no, maybe you're right. Kerry did "break the faith of the men with whom he served." Yeah. Right."
-Suzannah

Tell you what Suzannah, take a few years of your life and serve in the military, heck go to Canada and serve in their military if you're scared of going to war, afterwards we'll have this discussion again. Then the tides will have turned and you'll be able to understand of what I'm speaking.

And yes, I'm keeping your comment posted. I see no need to delete it.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Suzannah. All of your points are moot (and all of your responses, too). I mean, for one thing, about the links to Al Qaeda: "He didn't? I'm glad you told me. I guess we can just pack up all the troops now because you have informed the world that he didn't have any ties to Al Qaeda." She wasn't saying that we should back out because we know this. She was saying that we shouldn't have started the war in the first place because we had no proof.
The rest of your points aren't worth commenting on.
~Mia

Anonymous said...

Oh and about the oil - America uses way too much oil. If we keep going the way we are, we'll need to get lower-grade oil.

Edster said...

Mia,

You said "I agree with Suzannah. All of your points are moot (and all of your responses, too). I mean, for one thing, about the links to Al Qaeda: "He didn't? I'm glad you told me. I guess we can just pack up all the troops now because you have informed the world that he didn't have any ties to Al Qaeda." She wasn't saying that we should back out because we know this. She was saying that we shouldn't have started the war in the first place because we had no proof"

No she said " There was no reason for us to go after Hussein. He didn't have any ties to Al Quada."

Anything else that you read into it was absolutely your opinion and came from your perspective. My point is this: What little information that we (the American public) are privvy to is nothing more than drivel and hearsay. So where does she get her information? From the media? The media tells us whatever they feel will get them ratings. (it's called marketing.)

On to your second comment: "Oh and about the oil - America uses way too much oil. If we keep going the way we are, we'll need to get lower-grade oil."

Agreed America does use way too much oil. On the other hand we cannot use the lower grade of oil due to the fact that it cannot be distilled in such a way that would fulfill our needs.

If you are for the conservation of petroleum resources, there is always the nuclear options, the dam option, wind generators, solar generators and many options that haven't even been experimented with yet. The worst option at this point is coal fired power generators, as they contribute sulphuric dioxide to the atmosphere. So on that point we definitely agree.

Anonymous said...

The War with Iraq was started for what? To find the WMDs (or whatever you called them) and because we thought there was a link to Al Quada. I know we cannot back out now because we know that there are no WMDs and no link; I was just saying that we shouldn't have started it in the first place (like Mia said). You should have read more thoroghly to realize that we were saying, basically, the same thing.
~Suzannah
PS About the gas thing: Americans are stupid when it comes to gas. Why the hell do all of these people need SUVs? I think the higher gas prices might end up being a good thing and have people start driving more fuel efficient cars. Like why does a family with only one kid need a van?? 2 kids, I guess I can see if they play sports or whatever, and 3 kids makes sense (it's hard to fit them in a normal car), but seriously, people need to start driving cars that are just big enough for them.

Anonymous said...

Another point: I really don't care if you served your country. I mean, don't get me wrong, it's a good thing, but it doesn't make any difference to me in your opinion. What bothers me about Bush is that he avoided the draft. I wouldn't really care if there wasn't a draft and he just didn't volunteer. That would be different. I mean, it would still be better if he had signed up, but it wouldn't be such a big deal. So, I wouldn't be upset about you serving/not serving. It doesn't change your opinions (or how I interpret them anyway).
~Suzannah