Not the same thing?
Good responses, all of them.
The American War Crimes Museum and the Mai Lai Massacre aren’t being brought up on TV every other minute. Torture in Vietnam is, thanks to McCain.
They can’t like him.
[quote=“Gao Bohan”][quote=“KingZog”]It’s not the same thing. My Lai was done by criminals who were later tried by the US Army. Some US soldiers were actually given medals for trying to stop the massacre. Hueh was done by secret police types with a list of names from the North Vietnamese government. The North Vietnamese never tried anyone for Hueh because they didn’t consider it a crime, and would presumably not give medals to anyone who tried to stop them. Actually I suspect discussing it at all in Vietnam would still be very bad for your health.
Death squads, blacklists and mass graves are an absolutely fundamental part of Maoism
E.g. read this
Vietnam.ttu.edu/star/images/ … 02003a.pdf
The tragedy of My Lai and the US carpet bombing is that it allowed useful idiots to claim that ‘both sides commit atrocities, war is bad, peace is good, pull the troops out’ which allowed the Communists to send their death squads into every town in Vietnam.
But the two sides were never morally comparable.[/quote]
Excellent post.[/quote]
Yes, kind of like Australia just found five people guilty for plotting to blow up a football game, but they were only going to blow up football fans to protest Australia’s presence in Iraq, so that makes everything okay, and thus there are no threads about it on Forumosa. 
The confusion on Kerry’s record was a deliberate ploy fostered by his political opponents. It’s rather rich to stand back now and say, “well I dunno, cause well it’s sort of murky.”
HG
[quote]Actually, McCain seldom mentions his war experience. He’s displayed a lot of humility given his remarkable story. Giuliani mentioned 9/11 over and over and over again in every speech and debate, and people got sick of it.
By the way, I won’t be voting for McCain. Fighting in a war does not qualify a person to be president any more than not fighting in a war disqualifies a person to be president. I defend Kerry and McCain because I believe it is dishonorable to falsely impugn someone’s service for political reasons.[/quote]
That’s not true. He beats people over the head with his war experience.
[quote]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain
A newcomer to the state, McCain was hit with repeated charges of being a carpetbagger.[59] McCain responded to a voter making that charge with what a Phoenix Gazette columnist would later describe as “the most devastating response to a potentially troublesome political issue I’ve ever heard”:[59]
“Listen, pal. I spent 22 years in the Navy. My father was in the Navy. My grandfather was in the Navy. We in the military service tend to move a lot. We have to live in all parts of the country, all parts of the world. I wish I could have had the luxury, like you, of growing up and living and spending my entire life in a nice place like the First District of Arizona, but I was doing other things. As a matter of fact, when I think about it now, the place I lived longest in my life was Hanoi.”[/quote]
The response reeks of a man only too proud of his military service above all else, when faced with legitmate concerns that he was an outsider seeking local office.
This would be a legitmate concern for people wondering if someone was seeking residency status for the sole purpose of seeking office in a particular district. The Clinton got ask the same questions when they went to NY.
Bangladesh is not really an East Asian, nor would be referred to as a gook. I’m dead serious with the rise of China and with a country full of Americans of East Asian descent, his shocking hatred for “gooks” give many of us reservations for supporting him.
If Obama said casually that his life experience in the US justified his belief of, “I hate those whities/korean grocers/etc. I hate them as long as I live.” I would have serious reservations for supporting him as well. Do I really want a POTUS spending his time trying deal with his inner hatred?
Why would a season politician make such a comment. Because he believes that he there would be no backlash, no consequence. Maybe 20 years ago when I couldn’t vote. But not today.
If the man has issues with gooks. How will he deal with a rising communist China, or the rising population of Asian Americans in the US?
I for one find no reason to support a man that dismisses my group in a racially charged democracy like the US.
That’s not the only truth. Kerry himself created much of the confusion by refusing to release his records for such a long time, and then only partially and only to certain people, at least initially. And then there is the matter of Kerry secretly meeting with North Vietnamese diplomats in Paris even as Kerry was still in the Naval Reserve and all of his activities directed at stopping the war. There are many reasons that his record is a bit murky.
I’m not exactly new to the Internet. I’ve searched for something definitive on the matter, and I don’t see anything. If you would be so kind as to provide a link showing clearly the nature of and circumstances in which Kerry was wounded I would be happy to look at it.
But, even if you can do that, it doesn’t change the fact that as soon as Kerry had an opportunity to exit the war he did so (again, not that I blame him for doing so)… but there is certainly a contrast in this with McCain’s decision to remain a POW and be subjected to continuing torture by his captors.
I really don’t see how my opinion is so severely flawed as it relates to the difference between Kerry’s and McCain’s military records.
[quote]If the man has issues with gooks. How will he deal with a rising communist China, or the rising population of Asian Americans in the US?
I for one find no reason to support a man that dismisses my group in a racially charged democracy like the US.[/quote]
He hates gooks? Really? Jesus, it pains me to sympathize with ac, it really does, but if that’s true its bloody scary, sinister stuff for sure. Just as well he doesn’t have a hope in hell of winning the election.
[quote=“ac dropout”]If the man has issues with gooks. How will he deal with a rising communist China, or the rising population of Asian Americans in the US?
I for one find no reason to support a man that dismisses my group in a racially charged democracy like the US.[/quote]
He does not hate Asians. In fact, he was one of the most enthusiastic senators who worked to normalize relations between Vietnam and the US.
No need to feel the pain…
Actually, he very well might win the election.
Anyway, McCain apologized a few days after making the remarks.
If the Dims can forgive ex-grand wiz of the KKK, Byrd, who hated all them black folks even though them black folks never did nothin’ to old Byrd (other than be black), then surely the Dims can forgive McCain’s nasty one-time remark that was directed only at his captors and tormentors, who tortured him for 5 and a half years.
Or, more likely the Dims cannot forgive McCain, as harping on about that one remark is just too good for the Dims.
[quote=“Tigerman”]If the Dims can forgive ex-grand wiz of the KKK, Byrd, who hated all them black folks even though them black folks never did nothin’ to old Byrd (other than be black), then surely the Dims can forgive McCain’s nasty one-time remark that was directed only at his captors and tormentors, who tortured him for 5 and a half years.
Or, more likely the Dims cannot forgive McCain, as harping on about that one remark is just too good for the Dims.[/quote]
Chewy, I don’t know how you did that, but it’s not right to post from Tigerman’s account. Christ what next? Do we have to hear about Pierre Trudeau driving around dressed as a Nazi . . . again?
HG
As for the Kerry thing, the letter that the people who served with Kerry wrote to T. Boone Pickens is pretty informative.
[quote]It is no wonder Admiral Zumwalt said of this particular attack on Kerry: it is “a
disgrace to the United States Navy that there is any inference that that process was
other than totally honest. It is a disgrace to the honor and memory of the people
who served there.”6 Admiral Zumwalt’s words have particular meaning to us as
the men who were there. Three of us signed below (Langhofer; Medeiros;
Hirschler) were awarded Bronze Stars Medals for our actions on 28 February
1969; while four others of us received Navy or Army Commendation Medals
(Sandusky, Short, Thorson and Reese). Bill Rood and Don Droz both received
Bronze Star Medals, as did Tom Belodeau. Don Droz, a Naval Academy
graduate, who was subsequently killed in action in another river on another day,
wrote home to his wife how proud he was of what he and his crew did that day
with John Kerry. So, your group’s attack on Kerry’s Silver Star is not only a
flagrant, disgraceful assault on the integrity of Admiral Zumwalt and the United
States Navy which had previously confirmed the appropriateness of these awards,
it is also an attack on the courage and honor of all of us who were there, including
those who are not alive to defend themselves, and on the decorations we received
for our own roles in this same action.
The innuendo that Kerry “put himself in” for his Bronze Star Medal on a mission
where there was no hostile fire, is completely disproved by the man, Lieutenant
James Rassmann, USASF, who, after LTJG Kerry had departed the area and
without Kerry’s knowledge, personally recommended Kerry for saving his life; by
all of the other crew members who were actually on the boat in this ambush; by
the original document of recommendation for the Bronze Star by LTJG Kerry’s
Commanding Officer, Commander Elliott; by the first hand observations of the
Psychological Operations Officer, Lt. Jim Russell, riding on PCF 43, who
unsolicited wrote a public article in 2004 confirming enemy fire as well as LTJG
Kerry’s actions; and finally, by the awkward-for-you fact that one of your leading
members, OINC of PCF-51, Larry Thurlow, himself received a medal for heroism
under fire during the same incident and whose statements are completely
contradicted by his own gunnersmate, Robert Lambert. The fact is that the
procedures in place in Coastal Division 11 would never have permitted any
Officer in Charge of a Swift Boat to “put themselves in” for a medal and surely the
senior officers in command who controlled and signed off on such matters would
acknowledge this truth.[/quote]
I feel the spirit of chewy moving down my body into my typing fingers: I’d rather do driving around with Pierre Trudeau dressed as a Nazi than go driving with Ted Kennedy.
A nazi-sympathizer-turned-socialist-Castro-admirer who never worked a day in his life and who enjoyed spending other peoples’ money vs. an exam cheating coke addict with a pro-nazi father who never worked a day in his whole life and who murdered his pregnant secretary. Hmmm…I’d rather walk on my hands than ride with either of them if they were both alive.
Of course, the Nazis were socialist too 
[quote=“KingZog”]It’s not the same thing. My Lai was done by criminals who were later tried by the US Army.
[/quote]
And how many of them were convicted? Didn’t most of them get off on the excuse that they were “following orders”?
30 years later.
Agreed, but none of this justifies American intervention in Vietnam, or the carpet bombing, use of chemical weapons, murder of innocent civilians or any other criminal actions committed by US forces.
[quote]Death squads, blacklists and mass graves are an absolutely fundamental part of Maoism
E.g. read this
Vietnam.ttu.edu/star/images/ … 02003a.pdf[/quote]
They were primarily nationalists, not Maoists.
[quote]The tragedy of My Lai and the US carpet bombing is that it allowed useful idiots to claim that ‘both sides commit atrocities, war is bad, peace is good, pull the troops out’ which allowed the Communists to send their death squads into every town in Vietnam.
But the two sides were never morally comparable.[/quote]
No My Lai and the carpet bombing were tragedies by themselves. So was the massacre at Hue. Tell me how exactly did opposition to the war by “useful idiots” in the West “allow” the Communists to commit war crimes.
In any case the Hue massacre occurred before My Lai.
Would these war crimes have been committed if the US had not intervened in Vietnam?
How do you measure “moral equivalence”?
Why are people constantly talking about the Vietnam war as some kind of heroic endeavour? Why are you trying to justify it on the basis that the North Vietnamese were even worse?
And that lying sack of T Boone Pickends (it’s hard not to see that name and think SCAMMER) has also welched on the bet.
Two birds, one stone.
HG
And how many of them were convicted? Didn’t most of them get off on the excuse that they were “following orders”?[/quote]
Nice Godwin there, I suspect you’ll try to derail the argument into quibbling about definitions soon.
Following orders isn’t a valid defense in the US as far as I know, what with the whole Nuremburg thing.
30 years later. [/quote]
It’s still a sign that America as a country did not condone My Lai. How many people were tried for Hueh? Vietnam’s communist government still hasn’t admitted there even was a massacre at Hueh, not even 30 years later.
The US did all that in World War II too. Guess what, war is nasty, especially with the level of technology at the time and the cavalier approach even the most civilised countries had to collateral damage. But it’s a sometimes necessary when you’re trying to stop totalitarian scum from taking over.
Ahh, the quibbling.
Right, and there is no way a murderous politician would lie unless he was American.
Because it caused US troops to be pulled out and the Communists to take over South Vietnam. The point I’m making is unlike the US, the communists didn’t just commit “war crimes”. Their whole political movement was based on violence. Once the US left they could turn that violence on their Vietnamese opponents. That’s the reason that it was morally justified to use violence against them.
Well only one person, William Calley, was convicted. He eventually only served 4.5 months in a military prison for his actions. Some justice eh?
The accused used the “only following orders” defence in direct contravention of the precedents established in the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials.
No it’s not, it’s a sign that there has finally been some acknowledgement, 30 years late-not whether or not it was condoned at the time.
Carpet bombing and use of chemical weapons a “cavalier approach to to collateral damage.” That doesn’t sound so bad does it?
How about mass slaughter?
So you were wrong then?
Of course he might lie, just thought it was a nice, succinct quote to illustrate my point. Do you have any evidence that the North Vietnamese were Maoists, or am I just “quibbling”?
And against the Vietnamese civilian population, and even people in neighbouring countries. But that’s okay, it’s only “collateral damage.” We can be a little “cavalier” about that kind of thing and still be “civilised”.
I take you’re not in favour of the US intervening in Vietnam. How about World War II?
[quote=“KingZog”]
I take you’re not in favour of the US intervening in Vietnam. How about World War II?[/quote]
The Second World War is an entirely different case. The same tactic as comparing opponents of the Iraq war with Munich appeasement. False historical analogies.
It is absurd to try and invoke the perceived “just” nature of one war to support another.
For the record, it is difficult to see how the US could have avoided being drawn into WWII. The same cannot be said for Vietnam.