No announcement yet.

Kerry's "atrocities"

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kerry's "atrocities"

    Karen Hughes is calling on Kerry to provide more details on Kerry's statements in 1971 that he, along with others, committed atrocities while serving in Vietnam. As ever, the rabid Fonda-ite tip-toed around the question like a virtuoso tap-dancer, while his campaign office accused Hughes of misrepresenting Kerry comments. How can somebody misrepresent "atrocity".

    Some what's missing? What did Kerry do that we don't know about. Did he bayonet some mama-sans? Plant IEDs outside of schools? Posion the water supply of several villages? Why is he so evasive? Could it be that he recognizes this issue, as with his Fonda connections, is a posion pill to his campaign? Is the real John Kerry coming to light? Possibly his "godfather", Sen Kennedy, will need to make another appearance, mumbling his alcohol-sotted musings about the whole issue. To make it all the easier, I say we should put Kerry in a small, leaky boat, and send it TOWARD Cuba.
    Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
    (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

  • #2
    Only if we can send Bush with him. :P
    “To discriminate against a thoroughly upright citizen because he belongs to some particular church, or because, like Abraham Lincoln, he has not avowed his allegiance to any church, is an outrage against that liberty of conscience which is one of the foundations of American life.”


    • #3
      It is easy to misrepresent anything. How do you define atrocity? What is your perspective that defines it? Kerry could simply have been lumping himself into the "whole", with anyone who served and fought in Vietnam. To many the very act of war is an atrocity. To others, a hoodlum's attack on an elderly person is an atrocity.

      He may have been involved in an action that took the lives of innocents. Sorry, that is part of war, like it or not. It is unfortunate, but there it is. Don't mean to sound cold, only realistic. I would probably feel the same, if in that type of situation.

      I haven't been in a combat situation. I don't know how I would feel if I was trying to stay alive, and didn't know who was or was not an ally. I don't know.

      But, I can define an atrocity: 9/11!. I was in lower Manhattan that morning, just getting off the ferry. I was lucky that I worked on the east end of Wall St., not the west end near the Trade Center. Those who committed that atrocity have no remorse. Kerry at least, as a combatant, did. He may be acting a jerk over all of this, but he is admitting to being human, regardless of how one feels about his politics.
      Retreat hell, we just got here. Every Marine, a rifleman.

      Never let the facts get in the way of the truth.


      • #4
        Originally posted by Overseer
        Only if we can send Bush with him. :P
        ha ha! good one!

        Nah, Kerry is not responsible for any atrocities. What happened is that he made what appear to be false statements about atrocities committed by U.S. troops in order to jumpstart his political career!

        We have one putz lying to get into office and another putz in office who was AWOL from military service! sheeesh!

        Let's write in John McCain for President!
        All your ACG posts are belong to us!


        • #5
          It would seem that when your Presidential elections come up in November, Americans will have the same dilemna as we will have when our billionaire Prime Minister decides to call an election. Who do I want to lead my country?? Geez!!!!!!!!!!

          Soviet and Canadian medal collector!


          • #6
            It really is about the lessor of two weevils anymore...
            If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.


            • #7

     case they forgot to tell you.. War is by its very nature an atrocity. As Sherman said"War is hell" and that's about as atrocious as you can get. Killing other humans for whatever reason is an atrocity but we like to color it so that it only applies to the other side.

              I don't know if you've done much reading on the subject but the fire bombing of Dresden and Hamburg could most definitely qualify as an atrocity. Likewise the fire storms that Curtis LeMay put onto Tokyo and a few other Japanese cities would certainly qualify. That's even putting aside the effect of a nuclear fireball. So atrocity is a pretty broad term and since Kerry was Vietnam, and Bush wasn't, I guess Kerry's got the right to call it as he sees it. Unless of course you were there but never participated in anything even remotely similar to killing, maiming, or otherwise causing harm to another living thing. Do you love the smell of napalm in the morning?


              Latest Topics