General discussion


Sen John Kerry should be ashamed of himself

By jdclyde ·
Sen John Kerry should be ashamed of himself.

On "Face the Nation", Sunday December 4th, 2005, the Senator took to that airwaves accusing the US military of acts of terrorism against "kids and children, you know, women" and that it is the Iraqies that should be terrorising them instead.

"And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not...


Sen. KERRY: ...Iraqis should be doing that."
(end of page 4, beginning of page 5)

This is the man that was ALMOST President of the most powerful Country in the world? How is that for a scary though? And to think we MAY run again in 2008?

Read the interview if you didn't see it on TV before responding. Would hate to see people accusing anyone else of taking things out of context.

Do you think Sen. John Kerry is way out of line and should apologyze to the US forces, or is he stating something that is true but a hard pill to swollow?

Full transcript here in PDF format.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

141 total posts (Page 3 of 15)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

So you think

by jdclyde In reply to What?

it is acceptable for John Kerry to make statements like this that only serve to make the soldiers look bad to the world?

What would you say about someone making wild-eyed statements against the soldiers of the UK militarty? Take it a step further and they intentionally chose words that ONLY serve to inflame and do not accurately describe the situation?

Collapse -

Response to Tom

by Shifty78 In reply to So you think

I don't think its acceptable for anyone to make statements that make innocent soldiers look bad. (except for the scumbags taking pics of themselves abusing naked prisoners etc). Like I said, I feel sorry for the soldiers forced into a horrible situation like this. I'm not really sure what Tom means by 'I heard people spill that drivel saying "USA and UK went to war illegally" and still don't know what war was violated'. How do you violate a war??? If you mean what law was violated then as Kofi Annan says "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal." What don't you understand about this? The USA or the UK for that matter should not be above International law. Especially with a right wing, fundamentalist moron like Bush in charge. If you seriously believe we should be led into wars like this by a guy who believes he is doing 'what God told him to do' then you in my opinion are no better than the Muslim fundamentalist nutters who support suicide bombers and suchlike. I have never argued that Saddam didn't needed to be gotten rid off but I don't think we've done ourselves any favours by basing our reasons for going to war on a student's thesis. By going to war on what was a LIE and by further trying to cover up this dishonesty we (USA and UK) have succeeded only in polarising opinion within our own countries and giving terrorist harbouring countries even more 'reason' to attack us. What about the 45 minute threat? Did Saddam manage to move all his WMDs to Syria in less than an hour? I doubt it.
To summarise, I have nothing whatsoever against the vast majority of soldiers from either the USA or the UK or anywhere else for that matter. My problem is with the self serving liars who send these guys to die and the blinkered fools like you who blindly follow them.

Collapse -

Just what I thought

by Montgomery Gator In reply to Response to Tom

Just as I suspected, the "illegal" action referred to "International Law", a nebulous concept at the best. What Kofi Annan says is not important, he is a toady of the socialists and left wingers. The only "International Law" that is relevant is treaties and agreements, and none were violated by the action to remove Saddam Hussein from power. In fact, Saddam Hussein violated the cease fire agreement by kicking the inspectors out of Iraq. Where do you get the "45 minute threat"? Saddam had months to move the WMDs out of Iraq, the months that led up to the war, where Saddam was given more than enough opportunity to let the inspectors back in but did not. "International Law" is conveniently used by those who oppose fighting oppressors and terrorists, it seems.

You show more of your irrational hatred by calling Bush a "moron". He may be "right-wing" but the problem is that he is not right-wing enough in that he has allowed the socialist nanny state to expand instead of contract. He may be "fundamentalist", if by that you mean he is a faithful Christian, but that should be considered a good thing.

As far as going to war as a "LIE", there is no evidence, other than that trumped up by the enemies of Bush and Blair. There was evidence that there was WMDs in Iraq before the inspectors were pulled out, Saddam just moved them. You are actually one of the "blinkered fools" that blindly follow the left wing media that has an axe to grind.

As far as the war supposedly creating terrorists, that is total BS. Those who hated the USA and the West (such as Al-Zarqawi and the Al-Qaeda organization) already did before the war, and would have attacked anyway, it would be outside of Iraq instead.

Bush and Blair are heroes and should be honored as such for their efforts to defend freedom and fight terrorism.

Collapse -

What Liberals don't seem to understand

by jdclyde In reply to Just what I thought

The job of the Weapons Inspectors was not to spend over ten years playing a shell game.

They were there for one reason, to witness and document Saddam dismanteling ALL of his WMD, some that he had already used in the past.

It is a very stupid or dishonest person to step up and say "weapon inspections were working".

For years, they were denied access.

How many times were they thrown completely out of the country?

Collapse -

Bush a hero???

by antuck In reply to Just what I thought

For what? You mentioned for their efforts to defend freedom and fight terrorism. Really, How come Bin ladin is still free? I had thought that Bin Ladin was the one responsible for the terrorist attack on the towers. Or did the left wing media lie about that and in reality it was Saddam?

I keep hearing people get upset about when Bush is called a liar. Well when has he told the truth? He made such a big case of going to war with Iraq. Yet the reasons he gave were false. Should we say he made false allegations, or he lied? I guess it depends on how people like to hear things.

Going to war in Iraq has not stopped terrorism nor will it. There are other countries, Iran, North korea, Syria (if that is where the WMD really went) China and more countries in that region that are of great concern.

Bush a hero. Again for what?

Collapse -

by Shifty78 In reply to Just what I thought

'International law, a nebulous concept at best' -Does this mean you think the UK/USA should be allowed to set the agenda for the rest of the world to follow? And you wonder why people argue with that? The UK/USA don't agree with it so lets just make our own rules and stuff anyone else who doesn't agree with us. Incidentally, its always puzzled me how someone whose brother disenfranchised so many minorities to allow him to become president the first time around has the gall to sanction thousands of deaths around the world in the name of democracy. What a joke! 'What Kofi Annan says is not important' - Well in my opinion what Bush says is even less so.

Tony Blair went on the tv news over here and lied to the British public by stating that Saddam had weapons with which he could attack us within 45 minutes. There has never, ever been any evidence of this. Also the vast majority of the British public were against sending our troops to war but this made no difference to Tony Blair. Is this an example of the kind democracy we are so generously exporting around the world?

I certainly don't oppose fighting oppressors and terrorists. Exactly why I disagree with pretty much everything Bush stands for.

"He may be "fundamentalist", if by that you mean he is a faithful Christian, but that should be considered a good thing" - why should this be considered a better thing than being a faithful Muslim, Hindu, Sikh or Jedi for that matter? Lets face it - nobody from any faith can prove any of it is true and they use their blind faith to excuse any number of crimes. Just like Bush.
Maybe I'd have more respect for him if he was able to string a sentence together.

And I don't hate the USA. In fact, I lived and worked there for two years and had a wonderful time and made some very good friends. I think its a wonderful country with a lot of great people and lots to offer the world. It doesn't mean I have to agree with with its despot leader. Except now it does doesn't it? 'If you're not with us, you're against us' he said (or something very similar). So much for free speech.

Collapse -

My dear Shifty78

by jdclyde In reply to Just what I thought

Your sources do you a dis-service and make you look pretty silly.

It has been shown that "disenfranchised so many minorities" never happened and is yet another lie spewed over and over until people believe it.

Several newspapers, as well as people like Jessie Jackson went over ALL the ballots with a fine tooth comb after everything was said and done LOOKING for something to rub Bush's nose in and found nothing. So the whole "stole the election" was just stupid people repeating what other stupid people were saying. A shame it made its way all the way over to the UK.

International law. Who exactly wrote this law, and under what authority, and will enforce that law how? The UN AND Kofi Annan has been shown to be corrupt and was looking out for his own interests, NOT the worlds interests, not to mention covering for his equally corrupt son. This is the person to tell us what is right and wrong? What charges has Annan filed against the US and the UK And the other nations that went into Iraq?

You agree Saddam should be taken out, just not by Bush?

As for Bush and his religion, he never said he was taking Bush out because God told him to take Saddam out. Please provide an unbiased source that shows Bush was following Gods marching orders.

Also, provide documentation showing more than an opinion that Bush and Blair lied rather than being wrong. Again, not from wingnuts at, but legal documented proof. Not a he-said-she-said witch hunt.

Difference between a Christian man of God and a Funamentalist Muslim? A Christian man of God does not believe in killing all the non-believers. how is that for a difference?

With us or against us. This is aimed directly at countries that harbor terrorists KNOWINGLY. There isn't a middle ground on that. If you support the terrorists and allow them to use your country as a haven as well as training grounds then you are an enemy to the rest of the free world. You can have all the free speech you want, but as soon as you hide and protect a terrorist it isn't a matter of speech anymore.

For us, or against us. Right on.

Collapse -

Please tell me

by jdmercha In reply to Response to Tom

What LIE are you refering to?

Collapse -

I just love the irony

by TonytheTiger In reply to Re-read it without pre-co ...

They try and justify a statement using a dictionary definition of a term, rather than its common usage. This, coming from a group who has named themselves using a word whose dictionary definition is the polar opposite of their political belief, is BEYOND belief :)

Collapse -

Reason? How about exterminating terrorists?

by raleighrealtor In reply to I didn't get terrorist

Until every terrorist is wiped off the face of the planet, there will be recurrances of what happened in New York on September 11, 2001. And if you think for one moment that Saddam is not a supporter of terrorism, especially against the US and Israel, then you have your head buried so far in the sand that you will never see sunlight. Terrorism has to be dealt with summarily and swiftly . . . and it's much more preferable to do it where it is than in the streets of America. Folks who wonder why we are in the middle east conducting this war are blind to two important facts: 1.) militant Islamics hate the Western way of life and 2.) they hate Americans and will kill them when and where they can.

Back to Community Forum
141 total posts (Page 3 of 15)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums