SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (18580)4/27/2004 4:47:36 PM
From: cnyndwllrRead Replies (2) | Respond to of 81568
 
Ann, it's nice to be able to comfort ourselves with the thought that the "questionable incidents" in Vietnam were because of the "draft" and that the reports of atrocities were false. The truth is that the incidents weren't questionable, that the atrocities were widespread, the "draft" had little or nothing to do with it and a majority of Vietnam combat veterans have not stated their opinions that the congressional testimony was false.

If you would, answer this for me:

In situations where you have a civilian population that's sheltering and supporting insurgents that are attacking and killing the occupying force, how do you think the soldiers feel about that?

And this:

If you were one of those soldiers and your friends were dying and left injured and screaming in agony because of phantom attackers that melted into the village after the attacks time after time, do you think you'd hate the villagers?

And this:

If you thought that you were going to die from the activity that came from the village would you call artillery, choppers, or bomb strikes down on the village? Would you burn it? Would you pretend to take fire from it and open up? Would you take what you wanted from the villagers without regard to their "rights?" Would you really care if women and children died if it protected you and your buddies? Would any of these fit your likely state of mind?

And this:

When you came home would you think the war itself was based on a false premise that we were "helping" the people of Vietnam and that the "war" could be won when the majority of the Vietnamese people supported the enemy and those that said they supported us had no heart?

And this:

Would it have been right to say what was going on there even though it meant veterans everywhere would be hurt and angry?

And this:

Would you have had the courage to say the truth anyway?

If you're honest in answering these questions then your thought process will mirror that of many of those that were there and came home.



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (18580)4/27/2004 4:47:56 PM
From: Patricia TrincheroRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 81568
 
Here's the post I told you about........... you can judge yourself as to how valid your various assumptions are after reading the post I wrote a few days ago.

Message 20051041



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (18580)4/27/2004 5:50:42 PM
From: American SpiritRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 81568
 
Kerry saw atrocities first-hand and they were VERY real.
Of course that depends how you define atrocity. In Kerry's case, he admits he went overboard a bit with his language but he saw and heard about many horrific events. His boat (just like in Apocalypse Now) did defend itself a few times by blowing away "possible enemy" who turned out to be civilians. Couldn't be helped but those were atrocities in Kerry's mind. Now multiply that times 1000 and you start to get the idea of what Nam was like, not even including the bombing and napalming.

Kerry lost a lot of friends in that war and could have been killed himself. He killed over 20 people according to the Navy. He did not like what he had to live with coming back from that war and felt it had no real meaning, especially since the war (like Iraq) was been based on a lie, was pointless and was going on forever. Kerry helped end the war. He did his part. It definitely saved a lot of lives what he did. His was a hero in battle and back home.