How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Missing Explosives, anyone???   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ]
 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Missing Explosives, anyone???

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


50 posted 10-29-2004 02:00 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
So there you have it...vote for who you feel will handle the current situation best.

Personally, I'm a little more concerned about the next situation. Should rumors start circulating that Colon has WMD, I'd just as soon not become another mistake.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


51 posted 10-29-2004 02:05 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
So you’re saying Kerry was right; that the Vietnamese were “murdered” by the United States?

Would you prefer a more polite euphemism, John? I can pretty much assure you, those who died won't care what you call it. Dead is dead.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


52 posted 10-29-2004 02:14 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Ron,

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So you’re saying Kerry was right; that the Vietnamese were “murdered” by the United States?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Would you prefer a more polite euphemism, John? I can pretty much assure you, those who died won't care what you call it. Dead is dead."

It makes a big difference to the living vets
who would then be characterized as murderers,
or do you think they should be?

John
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


53 posted 10-29-2004 07:01 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

To be honest, Mike, that was actually a lucid response. I don't buy the conclusion, of course, but then neither does this Republican:
http://anotherrepublicanforkerry.com/new/index.html


quote:
With Election Day fast approaching, it's time to get serious and start asking that important quadrennial question: Are we better off than we were four years ago?

Let's see. Our country is providing 90 percent of the troops in a tragic military operation in Iraq. Two more Americans have just been beheaded, and more than 1,050 U.S. soldiers have been killed. The CIA says the situation will remain just as bad and will likely get much worse as the next 12 months unfold.

In my home state of Ohio, the economy is killing jobs. More than 237,000 Ohioans have been put out of work during the past three years -- enough to fill two Ohio State University stadiums. Last month alone, another 11,800 Ohioans lost their jobs, for an average of 381 Ohio layoffs each and every day. The job cuts are happening at once-thriving companies like Longaberger (784 manufacturing layoffs and 215 administrative layoffs) and Techneglas (358 layoffs).

Some numbers are increasing. The deficit is at a Treasury-busting $422 billion. Poverty has worsened by nearly 14% -- up to 36 million Americans. And family health coverage premiums have gone up $2,600 a year.

But why worry? Thanks to our Ohio House and Senate, we can now carry concealed handguns. And thanks to President Bush's lack of leadership, the Brady Bill has been allowed to lapse, so we can freely buy our very own assault rifles.


But, really, your argument that Kerry won't do any better is simply misguided. I really do think Kerry will do a better job because, well, I'm not sure it can any worse. We have a screw up in the office now. Get rid of him and if Kerry screws up, let's vote him out in four years.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


54 posted 10-29-2004 08:23 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Well, I would be careful if I were you, Ron. Should Colon use wmd's to gas a few hundred thousand of it citizens, attempt to invade Ohio, refuse to let the UN conduct a full and unhampered inspection of its borders looking for those wmd's that they had already used, be recognized by two presidents (one democrat, one republican) as the most dangerous threat to the rest of the US....I think it's possible a Colonoscophy would not be out of the question

The only wmd's I see there are the Lions - and most of them seem to be duds.
Euphamisms? Sure, how about dispatched? Then we could rewrite the history books to claim that Al Capone and his gang dispatched quite a few citizens in his day. To say that killing is killing no matter if it is in wartime or shooting the milkman stretches it a little, I think. Kerry said the troops "murdered".....I don't even know why he's not in jail, confessing to committing the same actions. Is there a statue of limitations on murder?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


55 posted 10-29-2004 08:55 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I really do think Kerry will do a better job because, well, I'm not sure it can any worse.

Brad, it can ALWAYS get worse! How many people in the US have died in terrorist attacks in the past 3 years? You saying that couldn't have been worse?

As far as the figures are concerned, first many of their "results" come from before 9/11 until now, completely ignoring the fact that it could have had any detrimental effect on the economy. Second, you can scour for negative figures on ANY president in office and find what you want by the way you portray it. Are you saying that, if not for Bush, health care would have not increased? You wanna buy a bridge? You don't think people like John Edwards contribute to that increase? One of the major causes of the problem is claiming they will fix it - but in such a way that their method of being a major cause is not changed - sure. Or do you feel they will intruduce tort reform? You want some swampland with that bridge?

There will always be unemployment. There will always be people who don't want to work, too. There will always be sectors of the economy that will fall on hard times as others rise...it's the natural order. All I can say is that my belief from what I see is that middle class America is not dissatisfied with their lives. They earn, or have the opportunity to earn, a good living, they are not afraid to leave their house in the morning and they feel reasonably safe. Their biggest moments of anguish come from PTA meetings and rap music. If they didn't read the headlines or listen to the Democrats they would not even know that their lives were so miserable. Yes, you can go out and find the exceptions and hard luck stories and portray them as the norm, but they are not. You can also sit over there and read the news and come up with the conclusion that the streets of the US are war zones, everyone is starving, gestapo come knocking on doors on the hour and paint any picture you like. The reality is it ain't so. The democrats like to paint the blackest picture they can and convince the average american life is intolerable if they are not in power - and they wonder why they can't make headway.

Here are a couple of comments from the lips of the man with all the answers..

In an interview Thursday with "NBC Nightly News," Kerry said that if he'd been president then, "we might have gone to war," but he would have done so in a way that ensured "the American people weren't carrying the burden and the entire world understood."

Of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s fate, Kerry said: "It's absolutely impossible and irresponsible to suggest that if I were president, he wouldn't necessarily be gone. He might be gone. Because if he hadn't complied (with U.N. demands), we might have had to go to war."


...and let's not forget this one..

Kerry, also speaking with USA Today on Thursday, said he believes the outcome will be known Tuesday night, "just like I believed the Red Sox would win the World Series.

(under his breath I can hear him muttering " in the ninth inning of the last game with two outs)
___
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


56 posted 10-29-2004 10:40 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

I do think we can make this a better place to live even if there will always be poor people, always be crime, always be people who are angry . . . .

I'm far more interested in little steps in the right direction than no hope at all.

Kerry seems to be that kind of guy.

Bush does not.

I'm not sure I understand why you are upset with those Kerry quotes. They make sense to me. I know you have time problems but if possible, can you tell me more clearly what bugs you?

I'm not being fascicous, I promise.

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


57 posted 10-29-2004 10:45 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

I want to be clear, however. If Kerry screws up, in four years, I'll be on your side.

But we already have a screw up, why let him screw up more?

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


58 posted 10-29-2004 12:30 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Well, I would be careful if I were you, Ron. Should Colon use wmd's to gas a few hundred thousand of it citizens, attempt to invade Ohio, refuse to let the UN conduct a full and unhampered inspection of its borders looking for those wmd's that they had already used, be recognized by two presidents (one democrat, one republican) as the most dangerous threat to the rest of the US....I think it's possible a Colonoscophy would not be out of the question

Mike, I don't remember anyone in government suggesting we should go kick some ass because of the Kurds or Kuwait?

Frankly, an unwarranted colostomy would definitely be time for a new doctor, Mike. I certainly wouldn't keep the same one if he performed a potentially dangerous operation and then felt compelled to find new justifications after the fact. "Well, we didn't find the cancer we expected, Mr. Carnell, but you needed the operation any way so you could lose weight. Once you get past the terrible pain and pay all those hospital bills, I'm confident you'll be the better man for it."

Sorry, but a man who can't see his own mistakes is doomed to keep repeating them. But not on my, uh, village.  

quote:
To say that killing is killing no matter if it is in wartime or shooting the milkman stretches it a little, I think.

Wartime, Mike? That term seems to be getting a little muddy these days. We have a war on poverty, a war on drugs, and of course, a war on terrorism, none of which seem to have gone particularly well by the way, but no one ever quite got around to declaring war on Vietnam.

Which, of course, doesn't mean it wasn't one. War, very much like murder, seems to be best defined by context. When you're at the wrong end of an M16, it doesn't seem to matter whether you're a villager or a milkman, the results are certainly the same. There's a little hole going in, a great big hole coming out, accompanied by a gnawing sense of injustice that no one should ever have to die like that.

Scratch that. It doesn't really matter which end of the M16 you're holding, except maybe that one end gives you a little longer to consider that sense of injustice.

Anyone who thinks all who died in Vietnam were carrying weapons or posed an immediate threat clearly wasn't there in the late-Sixties. Innocents died every day, often for no other reason than they looked a whole lot like the enemy, and sometime just because it was expedient and safe. Take three parts fear, two parts anger, mix liberally with gunpowder, and the recipe probably isn't going to produce an American apple pie.

Do I blame the troops for the injustices I know happened in Vietnam?

One of my best friends, Steve, was with the 47th Scout Dogs, 101st ABN. The animals he worked with were extremely well trained and usually extremely vicious. They were as likely to bite someone they shouldn't as they were to stop their handler from walking into a hidden booby trap. Were they bad dogs when they snapped at a friend? Or animals just trying to survive after being thrust into a world not real conducive to survival?

The decisions we make, in war as in life, are our own responsibility and can't be blamed on others. I think the veterans who stood up against the injustices of Vietnam recognized and were responding to their own sense of responsibility. We might cringe at their allegations, might think they exaggerate or are wholly wrong, but we have to respect their intent. They know they can't change the choices they made, or perhaps saw others make, but they hope they can keep others from being thrust into a world where those choices have to be made. They just want injustice to take a holiday for a while.

Murder? That's a word that gets defined, and often redefined, by the survivors. The euphemism you want, guys, is collateral damage.

It's what we call it when innocent people get in the way of warriors trying to survive another day. There was a lot of collateral damage in Vietnam, as I suspect happens any time the battle lines are blurred and the difference between friend and foe is defined by the split-second reflex of an index finger. Some will contend that collateral damage is an inevitable consequence of war, something we just need to accept.

In my opinion, it's the acceptance that makes it murder.


Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


59 posted 10-29-2004 07:53 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Ron,

So the soldiers were murderers, yes or no?

John
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


60 posted 10-29-2004 09:27 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

John, have you stopped beating your wife yet, yes or no?

(... or, why do you think I spent an hour on an answer you would have me boil down to two seconds? In hopes, perhaps, someone would read and understand it? Sorry, mate, but life doesn't always come with Cliff Notes.)
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


61 posted 10-29-2004 09:57 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Ron,

"Murder? That's a word that gets defined, and often redefined, by the survivors. The euphemism you want, guys, is collateral damage."


“So the soldiers were murderers, yes or no?”

“John, have you stopped beating your wife yet, yes or no?”

They are not the same kind of questions,
and to me, (perhaps to vets), you spent a lot of time
dancing around a direct answer.

Try again:

So the soldiers were murderers, yes or no?

John

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


62 posted 10-29-2004 10:14 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

I've been waiting to say this for a long time.

John,

Do you mean that the fate of the greatest country the world has ever seen rests on semantics?

Vote for Kerry. We have more important things to worry about.

Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


63 posted 10-29-2004 10:30 PM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun

LOL, gotta laugh at Brad's reply.
Right on
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


64 posted 10-29-2004 11:52 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Vote for Kerry. We have more important things to worry about.

I think that would be a more accurate statement if it read "Vote for Kerry and THEN we'll have more important things to worry about."

I don't disagree with the "Let's give the other guy a chance and kick him out if he doesn't perform" mentality....in any other point in time....but not in this world.

As far as Kerry's comments, to be truthful we have written so much here that I'm not sure which ones you are referring to. Point me in the right direction and I'll do my best to answer....honest.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


65 posted 10-30-2004 12:10 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

They were as likely to bite someone they shouldn't as they were to stop their handler from walking into a hidden booby trap. Were they bad dogs when they snapped at a friend? Or animals just trying to survive after being thrust into a world not real conducive to survival?

So you are saying the soldier's mentality was the same as the dogs, Ron? I assume you must since you are using them as an example. I know they are called dogfaces but I'd like to think the similarity ends there!

The decisions we make, in war as in life, are our own responsibility and can't be blamed on others.

How does this thought pattern fit into the dog example?


I think the veterans who stood up against the injustices of Vietnam recognized and were responding to their own sense of responsibility. We might cringe at their allegations, might think they exaggerate or are wholly wrong, but we have to respect their intent.

Think they exaggerate? Just because Kerry compared them to the hordes of Ghengis Khan? No kidding. He referred to murder - not collateral damage. He referred to running amok. I know that, in isolated incidents, that did indeed happen. Kerry portrayed it as if every soldier over there was doing just that. Well, almost. When his swift boat comrades asked him how he could say that, he responded "Oh, I wasn't referring to YOU - just the others". I have an excellent idea of Kerry's intent and it is nothing worthy of respect.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


66 posted 10-30-2004 12:29 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Brad/Ron/Midnitesun

Over two million served in uniform in Vietnam.
Apart from those on the wall, most are still alive.
To them, (and perhaps their families), whether
or not they are considered as murderers still has some
importance.  It’s not semantics; I know the difference.

Now again:

So the soldiers were murderers, yes or no?

John
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


67 posted 10-30-2004 12:35 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
They are not the same kind of questions, and to me, (perhaps to vets), you spent a lot of time dancing around a direct answer.

They are exactly the same kind of questions, John. Both are questions specifically phrased to confirm assumptions regardless of any answer given. Or do you, perhaps, contend that no soldier has ever murdered a human being?

My earlier and longer response wasn't a dance around your question, which I prefer to ignore as naïve, but rather was directed to the more important question of why someone who fought in Vietnam has the right, and perhaps even an obligation, to speak out against injustices encountered there. Kerry's characterization of his personal experiences in country are exactly that, making them neither right nor wrong, just very personal. Short of being fabrications, which I don't believe they are, and apart from being ill expressed, which I think they often were, Kerry's protests don't detract from his honor, but rather add to it. At the time, he had little to gain, a lot to lose, and yet chose to do what he felt was right and necessary.

Arguing results is not the same thing as arguing intent. Even Kerry, I suspect, is probably less than pleased with the results of his actions, just as I'm sure Bush very much wishes he could have his share of do-overs. I, personally, think Kerry was right to protest one war and Bush was wrong to start another, but I also believe both men chose bumpy roads over smoother ones because they felt compelled to do what they thought, at the time, was right. I can argue results, vehemently so at times, without the need to impugn intent.

I believe we each have a greater obligation to truth than to patriotism, and any nation that can't stand in the light doesn't deserve to long hide in the dark. When protest becomes treason, I think every American needs to stand up and be called traitor.

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


68 posted 10-30-2004 01:16 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

"Myth: Most American soldiers were addicted to drugs, guilt-ridden about their role in the war, and deliberately used cruel and inhumane tactics.

The facts are:

91% of Vietnam Veterans say they are glad they served...

74% said they would serve again even knowing the outcome...

There is no difference in drug usage between Vietnam Veterans and non veterans of the same age group (from a Veterans Administration study)...

Isolated atrocities committed by American soldiers produced torrents of outrage from antiwar critics and the news media while Communist atrocities were so common that they received hardly any attention at all. The United States sought to minimize and prevent attacks on civilians while North Vietnam made attacks on civilians a centerpiece of its strategy. Americans who deliberately killed civilians received prison sentences while Communists who did so received commendations. From 1957 to 1973, the National Liberation Front assassinated 36,725 South Vietnamese and abducted another 58,499. The death squads focused on leaders at the village level and on anyone who improved the lives of the peasants such as medical personnel, social workers, and schoolteachers."

http://www.vhfcn.org/stat.htm


As its dominant tactic in their battle against the war, the antiwar movement successfully demonized Vietnam veterans by calling a series of "tribunals" or hearings into war crimes. But... they were packed with pretenders and liars -- historian Guenter Lewy, writing in "America in Vietnam"

“Another consensus also gradually emerged. At first, rather than giving returning veterans of the war welcoming parades, Americans seemed to shun, if not denigrate, the 2 million-plus Americans who went to Vietnam, the 1.6 million who served in combat, the 300,000 physically wounded, the many more who bore psychological scars, the 2,387 listed as "missing in action," and the more than 58,000 who died. Virtually nothing was done to aid veterans and their loved ones who needed assistance in adjusting. Then a torrent of fiction, films, and television programs depicted Vietnam vets as drug-crazed psychotic killers, as vicious executioners in Vietnam and equally vicious menaces at home. Not until after the 1982 dedication of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C., did American culture acknowledge their sacrifice and suffering, and concede that most had been good soldiers in a bad war.”

http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/vietnam/postwar.htm


I'm sure there's more, just as I'm sure
it makes no difference.

John
Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


69 posted 10-30-2004 02:23 PM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun


As far as the explosives are concerned, there were more than just one or two locations that had stockpiles of 'something suspicious,' and some of those materials were apparently detonated/destroyed/some stolen/some "missing"? who knows what and how much? I really don't find it at all surprising that the troops didn't find everything, that they didn't have enough time to take an accurate semi-annual Inventory account, they have been spread far too thinly in that hell hole and dodging bullets and bombs. Oh, and this 'after the quick victory.' Some victory

But BOO HOO HOO! the commander-in-chief is having to dodge some word flack!
Others are taking the deadly flack...bullets and bombs, then going home in giant zip lock bags.
I doubt in the long run we'll ever account for all of what was once there. After all, some of it may have already been put to use.
Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


70 posted 10-30-2004 02:33 PM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun

John? why are you perpetuating/highlighting that myth business? I have never ever heard anyone with an ounce of intelligence or understanding say such a thing. Then you go on as IF it had some validity, offering stats and trying to argue some pointless point.
Frankly, I'm annoyed by the constant commando/interrogation techniques, that seem to do nothing to clarify or shed light on truth.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


71 posted 10-30-2004 05:58 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

It's not just word flak, Kacy. It was the long planned "October Surprise" by Kerry and his friends in the media. It is despicable because it was a deliberate attempt to sway the election, with CBS originally planning to air it tomorrow night, creating a situation of charges being thrown out with no time for the administration to fairly answer the charges before election day. After the Dan Rather scandal, you'd think they'd be a bit more subtle in their propaganda attempts. And I hope enough folks are ticked off by it to have their "surprise" blow up in their faces.

It's dirty politics, plain and simple, and it is disgusting. And people say the Republicans are the dirty players? None of this stuff is coming from the Republicans, it's all been from the Democrats.

Today I received literature in the mail from a Democratic backed organization showing a "Whites Only" sign on a door, and a statement that this is what Republicans want to do to YOUR (Blacks) voting rights. A truly vile piece of propaganda. The literature that I have received from Republican backed organizations have been expositions of policy differences, nothing like this piece of garbage that I received today. I guess desperation and a lack of popular policy positions leads to this type of campaigning.

Requiring ID and/or your voter registration card at the voting booth is not an attempt at supressing the minority vote. Showing up at your designated polling location is not a way of supressing the vote. They are ways of ensuring a fair vote, a one vote per registered voter vote. I heard that 9 out of the 18 hijackers of 911 cast a ballot in the previous election. How did that happen when they weren't even citizens?

I think we should scrap all current registrations and start over from scratch to rid the system, as much as is possible, from fraud. Everyone should have to go, in person, (the only exemption being a bona-fide medical condition) with I.D. to their voter registration office. I think we'd get rid of lots of dead people whose names have been hijacked by others and we'd also get rid of lots of ficticious names and addresses on the rolls that don't belong there. But, by-and-large, the Democrats are against this. Why?

I understand why John brought up the myth and the facts. The myth is the perception of the Vets that had been foisted upon our society after the Vietnam war. The facts tell a different story. I think we need to hear more of them. We're obviously still a nation divided over Vietnam, but I don't think it does any good sweeping it under the rug. We need to talk about it openly.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


72 posted 10-30-2004 06:32 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Midnitesun,

“Another consensus also gradually emerged. At first, rather than giving returning veterans of the war welcoming parades, Americans seemed to shun, if not denigrate, the 2 million-plus Americans who went to Vietnam, the 1.6 million who served in combat, the 300,000 physically wounded, the many more who bore psychological scars, the 2,387 listed as "missing in action," and the more than 58,000 who died. Virtually nothing was done to aid veterans and their loved ones who needed assistance in adjusting. Then a torrent of fiction, films, and television programs depicted Vietnam vets as drug-crazed psychotic killers, as vicious executioners in Vietnam and equally vicious menaces at home. Not until after the 1982 dedication of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C., did American culture acknowledge their sacrifice and suffering, and concede that most had been good soldiers in a bad war.”

It’s a pretty good summary of how it was.

I’ve been trying to get some here to:
“concede that most had been good soldiers in a bad war.”

and not murderers.


John

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


73 posted 10-30-2004 08:02 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I just finished watching the excerpts from "Stolen Honor". Ron, watch it and then let's talk about truth, patriotism and collateral damage.

Hopefully, enough undecided voters will see it to insure this despicable man does not get into office.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


74 posted 10-30-2004 08:54 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

quote:
Bush hasn't had to do anything well. All he's had to do is point out that he's on your side and that the guy on the other side is a mass-murdering lunatic. For a blissful month and a half, we managed to cut through that shtick and notice how badly Bush has run the country. Now Bin Laden has brought the shtick back. Bush can talk about his values instead of his record. He can stop running against John Kerry and go back to running against people who hate America and murder children.

I remember when Bush addressed Congress after Sept. 11. I thought history had given him a mission he couldn't screw up. Bush had only two virtues--moral clarity and resolve—and a terrorist attack on our country called for both of them. I didn't realize that his judgment was so bad it could turn these virtues into vices, confusing two enemies and letting the more dangerous one get away.


Face it, the only reason to vote for Bush is bin Laden.

And you would still be listening to a foreigner.

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Missing Explosives, anyone???   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors