http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=x0SxHvU5NhE
No, I'm not serious about this, but it does make me wonder about the double standard of those that want to bring Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld up on war crimes charges. Kerry, after all, admitted to Congress that he committed "attrocities".
2007-12-31 16:12:46 · 13 answers · asked by madd texan 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Mr. Morden:
O.K., lets have a serious discussion. Just what "war crimes" have or should Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld be charged with? I believe you miss my point. On one hand, you have a former soldier who admits to Congress that he committed attrocities in Viet Nam, on the other, you have a president, vice president, and sec. defense who haven't been charged with any war crime. And you and others want the ones who haven't been charged to be punished, while the one that ADMITS to committing war crimes continues to be a US senator.
I seriously don't think Kerry should be brought up on charges. For one thing, I think he's lying about the whole thing, but if you guys seriously think Bush and the others should be, then you MUST support Kerry being charged also.
2007-12-31 17:34:22 · update #1
Besides, I don't buy your argument that tens of thousands of VietNam vets are guilty of atrocities.
2007-12-31 17:37:12 · update #2
YES, but he might be vice Pres. if Hillary wins.
The so- called Democrats only speak up for those who believe what they believe.Now if a political member of their party breaks the law (s), the other members will quickly cover it up, and cause something secretly to happen in order to refocus the negative attention back onto the Republicans. They are still angry because the Republicans are still in the White House.
Now, if a real Democrat speaks up for staying in Iraq, and supports a Republican, then the so- called Democrat party will do what they do to the American citizens ( Shame Them!)
SHAME: as in what they DID to Joe Lieberman.
1. A painful emotion caused by a strong sense of guilt, embarrassment, unworthiness, or disgrace.
2. Capacity for such a feeling: Have you no shame?
3. One that brings dishonor, disgrace, or condemnation.
4. A condition of disgrace or dishonor; ignominy.
5. A great disappointment.
They shame fast food restraints, when in fact it is a personal choice of the customer's right to be a glutton.
Smokers are shamed into giving up their freedom to smoke, and businesses to have the say of what they do or do not want in their own business. But yet the Democrats want to legalize pot. They don't tell us that pot is worse than a pack of cigs or the fact that is eats away at brain cells.
You see I grew up in homes where all the children walked, breathed in cigarette smoke day in and day out, no health problems, untill they smoked pot with our dad, now 4 out of 5 of us kids have breathing problems and are on S.S.A. BECAUSE OF LEARNING DISABILITIES.
It is the truth they hide, and we Americans let them shame us into control. "Submission"
These Socialists have taken over the title of " Democrat"
Democrat means " An advocate of the people" and Democracy means " Government BY the people"
Demo means--- Distruction.......as in what is to come, look at how they have been since the Republicans have won the White House (Whine babies, accusers and judges........)
Socialists what total control and they will SHAME you into submission.
Submission means
1. The act of submitting to the power of another: "Oppression that cannot be overcome does not give rise to revolt but to submission" (Simone Weil).
2. The state of having submitted. See Synonyms at surrender.
3. The state of being submissive or compliant; meekness.
4. The act of submitting something for consideration.
Something so submitted: read three fiction manuscripts and other such submissions.
2008-01-01 00:47:55 · answer #1 · answered by Cheryl 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Who exactly is charging Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld with war crimes? Last I looked, there were no charges; just people talking politics. I would be very surprised if any charges will ever be filed against Bush or Cheney.
In short, a soldier or officer has nowhere near the authority of a President. Any "war crimes" committed by the Commander and Chief will be at a much higher level than the actions of a soldier.
I just don't see how you can compare them. Whatever Kerry may or may not have done was probably related to orders from superior officers, whether implied or direct. Bush and Cheney are not acting on orders, they decide whether we are at war or not and the full responsbility for the Iraq War rests with them. An army officer has nowhere near that level of authority.
If you wanted to talk about Kerry's activities in Viet Nam, that's one thing, but I think you are confusing the issue when you call it a "double standard" regarding charges of war crimes against Bush and Cheney that don't exist.
2008-01-01 13:06:41 · answer #2 · answered by majnun99 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
One has to wonder why Kerry didn't share a cell with Lt Wm Calley for admitting to committing similar war crimes.
http://www.petitiononline.com/investky/petition.html
If anything, Kerry should have been brought up on charges of treason for collaborating with the VietCong while still a member of the US Navy.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1091943/posts
2008-01-01 02:20:28 · answer #3 · answered by John W 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes!
2008-01-01 00:29:44 · answer #4 · answered by Neal 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
That's a diversion, a straw man argument. You're trying to shift focus from the actions of the president, vice president and former secretary of defense. You're not willing to engage in a serious discussion about the accusations leveled at them. You're not willing to look at it objectively.
In the case of Kerry if you were to charge him with war crimes you would have to charge 10's of thousands of other vets.
2008-01-01 00:23:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Only if Bush and Cheney are first.
2008-01-01 00:22:59 · answer #6 · answered by Jeremiah 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
HAHAHA....No, I'm not serious about this. that's Texas 2 step and you know it kid.
2008-01-01 00:21:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
John McCain bombed women and children in Hanoi.
Kerry shot a viet cong.
Bush went AWOL after his free flying lesson.
I don't see the Kerry crime
2008-01-01 00:20:42 · answer #8 · answered by Honest Opinion 5 · 7⤊ 2⤋
Not only Kerry, but slick willie and his wife..how in the heck can either one of them still be walking around...they should have been in jail years ago.
2008-01-01 00:20:21 · answer #9 · answered by greatrightwingconspiritor 5 · 3⤊ 5⤋
Hmmmmmmmmm!? Interesting conundrum. Maybe the difference is the degree of guilt. Was an SS guard at Auschwitz as guilty for the atrocities, as Hitler was? Hmmmmm?
2008-01-01 00:20:05 · answer #10 · answered by Crystal Blue Persuasion 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋