English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Is this any different than what Kerry did?

Would Bush or Cheney feel any different if they'd actually had bullets fired at them in anger?

2007-01-28 07:48:19 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

19 answers

Well, seeing as how they went there and put their butts on the line, the word "coward" doesn't fit very well. Bush used a deferment to get out of Vietnam and Cheney never served. That would qualify them as cowards.

2007-01-28 07:53:55 · answer #1 · answered by tranquility_base3@yahoo.com 5 · 11 4

Of course not, Scott.

And I don't believe anyone with half a brain would imply that.

On the other hand, neither are they the majority, military strategists or historical experts.
Their opinions are only that, opinions.
They are based on a very small part of the overall war - the part they personally experienced. And I respect that.

I am a Viet Nam Veteran - upon returning home, I did not support any veteran groups that were publicly protesting the war - it just didn't seem right to do this while fellow American soldiers were still in harms way. But that was just my feelings at the time and I hold no strong feelings either way if a veteran truly feels he is doing the right thing by protesting - I just don't personally see any good that will come of it.

And as far as "War Hero" Kerry's exploits in the Senate hearings go - there's no comparison. Period.

2007-01-28 08:19:14 · answer #2 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0 0

There ought to be any volume of troops helping the conflict yet do you think of CNN or the different information organization might take a picture like that to press? Hell no!! yet you get a pair protesting the conflict and you may think of the great militia grew to become into approximately to desolate tract. The media is killing this united states with biased reporting. that's that way in each and every thing. in case you have self belief each and every thing the media spews out i might want to sell you some best actual assets in SE Florida.

2016-09-28 02:47:31 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

They are not cowards. However,I think they are a very small minority who have allowed their opinions to be co-opted and used by liberals such as Jane Fonda(who should have had her US citizenship revoked after her visit and photo op with the North Vietmanese)and others who hate the conservative agenda on both social and political grounds.With regard to the question about Bush or Chaney,have you ever been fired at or had a gun pointed at you?I was held up at gunpoint and felt the steel of a gun barrell in my side during an armed robbery.Does that mean that I should protest police who attempt to enforce the law or should I have formed a protest saying that all criminals should have the right to steal from whomever they wish and that crime victims should give up without a fight?Perhaps in your world all a criminal should have to do is hand his victim a note demanding that the victim allow themselves to be robbed or raped.

2007-01-28 08:10:45 · answer #4 · answered by bigheadedb rat 2 · 2 1

No, they're not cowards, but it most definitely is different that what Kerry did. Kerry didn't testify against the war, he testified against the soldiers. Vietnam was a horrible war, but he essentially blamed the soldiers, most of whom were drafted and relatively uneducated, for the atrocities committed. Way to divide the country, Johnny.

I don't understand "bullets fired at them in anger". At the protests, or in the war?

Most Vietnam veterans protesting the war were heroes too, but Kerry's persecution of the soldiers was simply wrong. It wasn't unfounded, but he wasn't attacking the source.

The 2004 election fielded two of the weakest candidates in history, I'm sorry to say.

2007-01-28 07:58:02 · answer #5 · answered by Richardson '08 3 · 2 3

The whole Cowardice thing is over stretched. It's roots go back to suicide attacks When Roman Generals commanded the army to attack knowing it would wipe out the army.

Many times it was for lack of food or money yo pay the troops. But refusing to attack insurmountable odds has been a tool of control for at least 2000 years.

Cowardice in not the antonym for Heroic. Closer to survival than to disobedience.

Protesters sometimes are just protesters.

Go big Red Go

2007-01-28 08:02:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Both the vets & Kerry are to be admired. They know what it's like to fight in an unjust war. Bush & Cheney are the cowards, and so are the people that condone this war.

2007-01-28 08:08:55 · answer #7 · answered by mstrywmn 7 · 1 3

They are not cowards.. and neither was Kerry. they are people who did what they believed and stood by it. while others hid behjnd daddy and did a cheer leading gig for his time at war.

2007-01-28 08:01:22 · answer #8 · answered by Debra H 7 · 3 1

I would rather think they are Patriots! Members of congress are the cowards..not because they are against the war but because they didn't have the balls to do anything....a non-binding resolution....give me a break!

2007-01-28 07:59:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

Hardly. And unlike ANY of the current leadership, they acutally saw combat and served a full tour of duty. I still think the Spinboat liars who went after Kerry did not have anything on him.

2007-01-28 07:57:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

fedest.com, questions and answers