Watch "stolen Honor" Online

[350HP930]

And bush?

[CarreraS2]

What about Bush?

[350HP930]

Bush dodged the war while claiming he was for it and has a current habbit of sending other people to their deaths for his own opportunistic goals. Does that not rise above the accusations made against kerry above?

[CarreraS2]

"Dodged the war" . . . There are a lot of versions of what happened, from what I can see, and many vary wildly. The common ground seems to be that he served in the Air National Guard. That he came from an influential family and maybe received some kind of preferential treatment in getting into the Air National Guard. That while he was there, he may not have shown up some of the time.

Does that make him a war hero like his dad was? Nope. As a man, Jr. didn't experience anything like Sr. did, and in my eyes, Jr. isn't half the man (as a person), that Sr. is.

But this issue is an old one, was around during the first election, and Bush was elected. So I'm not sure of the current relevance. Just because of the above, he should be prohibited from exercising the power and making the decisions inherent in the presidency?

"Current habit of sending other people to their deaths for his own opportunistic goal." 2 parts to that one. He is the commander in chief, and sending people to their deaths is often an unfortunate part of that job. "His own opportunistic goals," . . . now that's getting interesting. What do you think his "own opportunisitic goals" were that caused him to knowingly, wrongfully send troops to Iraq? (As you suggest, these should be goals that are personal, opportunistic and self-promoting to him).

[slakjaw]

since I never watched Farenheight 911 I will not watch this.

Kyle

[911pcars]

Here's an attempt to get this back on topic:

Island wrote:
"....that is laughable. .. .News!? .. that is what your going with?"

Not I. That's what Sinclair was going with.

" .....it happened 30+ years ago. That makes it history. (not news)"

That's right Island. If they want to show it on regular programming, that's up to them, but to present it as news is disingenuous at best and extremely biased at worse. It'd be like CBS broadcasting F911 as a news event (which it isn't BTW).

"how can you argue that our "news environment" has been remotely close to telling both sides? Rather is just the tip of the propaganda iceberg being passed off as news."

Where did you see that? I didn't say that. I said news programs should present news in a fair and balanced manner; both sides. It shouldn't be biased. Furthermore, it shouldn't pander to the bottom line with major emphasis on titillating news stories on Coby Bryant, Michael Jackson, Lacy Peterson and Martha Stewart. I'm not defending any of the major network's news departments. I think they all need a ***** slap.

"...this piece is about setting straight a distorted record."

That's fine if that's the film maker's position. VN was 30 years ago. It's no longer news unless this is the first time someone has ever heard the opinions of VN POWs. I don't doubt what these gentlemen said - that's what they believe. But face it, Sinclair Broadcasting appears they wanted to do this to persuade voters, not to present news. That was my point.

dd74 wrote:
"Sinclair, however, did what Michael Moore did not need to do, which was bend to corporate pressures"

Sinclair Broadcasting received an FCC license and with that comes a responsibility to the American public for using the public airwaves. In the end, they relented because people protested this planned event for what it was, a documentary blaming Kerry for the plight they were in as POWs, not a news event which Sinclair had advertised.

Moore's film is different. You have to buy a ticket to see his view of the situation. The public airwaves (TV and radio) should not be used in the name of news to present slanted viewpoints; a practice that is all too common nowadays but blatant as was proposed by Sinclair.

------------------

OTOH, someone tell me how soon our POWs would have been released had we not ended the war? I assume no one actually knows how long the war would have continued if people did not protest. If you claim you do, you're gifted and your talents would be better utilized elsewhere. As a reminder, people protested the war because they felt the US was there for the wrong reasons. I realize there's another side of the argument.

Our treatment of returning VN vets was misplaced and shameful. It should have been solely directly at our leaders (democrats and republicans) who had their own perceptions of the situation and rationalized reasons for waging war. To say rape and killing of civilians didn't exist (as these ex-POWs claim) is not true; **** happens in any war. And while the US, in general, was blamed for war crimes that occurred, this really applied to administration and military leaders who let this happen, not to individual soldiers who risked or sacrificed their lives for what they thought or were led to believe was the right thing to do. And that includes POWs. Unfortunately, they were the American scapegoats for their VN captors. Does anyone believe the Viet Cong/RVN army didn't know of war atrocities before they heard it from Kerry?

Whether torture, murder and/or rape is deemed govt. policy depends on the extent it's known, tolerated or condoned by those in charge. In that regard, I think it's safe to say some of our civilian and military leaders did. Just to make sure, I'm still talking about VN, not the current situation in Iraq.

Slakjaw,
Why not watch both? If you have your mind made up already, what's the harm? Might learn something new or see another side of the story. Ask a liberal friend who will loan you the Moore video or DVD then draw your own conclusions.

Sherwood

[island911]

Sherwood, did you watch the piece?

[911pcars]

Yes, about 42 minutes long.

Sherwood

[island911]

Conjecture aside, the bottom line is this:

John Kerry has a sea of PO'd veterens.
This has spilled over . . .lingered, into our current military. (74% support Bush)
John Kerry REFUSES to acknowledge this as a problem. (his response: what happened to all my hair.)
John Kerry REFUSES admitt the depth of the problem he created in his quest for face-time.

[island911]

Ooooh. .. Cut & Paste obfuscation, with a dash of bait.

Now help me out here . .. which ones of those listed, hyped and promulgated vast stories of our soldiers being murderous rapists?

That is the topic.

[island911]

We are all given a finite amount of time here. A whole lot of those on your many lists have devoted HUGE portions of their time to combating the problem. Yet you will say they are "selling out your country" by directing troops who SIGNED UP TO PHYSICALLY PROTECT THIS COUNTRY! --nice--

You can not deny the reality that, even though many troops are away from their families, in a nasty sand-pile, doing tough work, THEY STILL SUPPORT THE RE-ELECTION of PRESIDENT G.W. BUSH.

[island911]

I'm not going to try to prove that negative.

Again;
--John Kerry has a sea of PO'd veterens; who strongly believe that Kerry is, and has been completely FOS.
This has spilled over . . .lingered, into our current military. (74% support Bush)
--John Kerry REFUSES to acknowledge this as a problem. (his response: what happened to all my hair.)
--John Kerry REFUSES admitt the depth of the problem he created in his quest for face-time.

[bryanthompson]

War is dirty, and bad things happen.

John Kerry came back from 'nam and accused his soldiers of committing these atrocities "on a daily basis."

Hundreds of prisoners of war were held in N. Korea being tortured based on what John Kerry was running around saying in the US.

You're okay with all of that?

[rcecale]

Before anyone goes and gets all bent out of shape, I'm thinking that Mr. Thompson meant to say "N. Viet Nam", not "N. Korea."

I could be wrong, and I certainly am NOT trying to speak for anyone on this board but myself. I'd just hate to see this whole thing taken out of context or whatever. Just trying to keep things "fair and balanced."

Bryan, if you wanna change your post, I'll delete this reference to it.

Randy

[bryanthompson]

oops, yep rcecale, i meant N. Vietnam. Shouldn't be reading the forum at work anyhow :P

[350HP930]

Has anyone besides me noticed that in the new swifboat ad that not one of them is black? That seems mightly suprising concidering how many vietnam vets were.

I guess SBVFT must be a pretty exclusive organization.

[fintstone]

Originally posted by LynnsABCs
...
And soldiers didn't committ atrocities like cutting off ears? VC prisoners weren't shocked using car batteries or radio handsets?

No.

[350HP930]

So what was operation phoenix then fint?

[BillyIdaho]

I personally know Vietnam vets who regularly shot POW's in Vietnam, rather than haul them out of the bush to the rear to process.

Also know Vets who would never have done it, or allowed it.

Pretty much goes the spectrum.


Did the VC need an excuse to torment American prisoners?
You think if John Kerry had not spoke up to help bring our boys back home the Hanoi Hilton would have ended up like some Asian version of Stalag 13?

Give me a break. But just in case, I have my raft, and I ain't afraid of alligators. Bring on de nile...I sense monsoon season.

[island911]

Originally posted by 350HP930
Has anyone besides me noticed that in the new swifboat ad that not one of them is black? That seems mightly suprising concidering how many vietnam vets were.

I guess SBVFT must be a pretty exclusive organization.

Yeah, CBS is reporting that John Kerry insisted on keeping the swifties an exclusive organization. However, it was GW Bush who insisted women be kept out of the military.

They have memos and everything.

read: how stupidly desperate are you guys?