Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Ted Kennedy's Speech: Treason or disagreement?
Topic Started: Apr 6 2004, 11:18 AM (2,090 Views)
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Ted Kennedy made a speech to the Brookings Institute yesterday. In it he said that Iraq was "George Bush's Vietnam" and that the Bush Administration had the "worst credibility gap since Richard Nixon."

Let's look at a few things:

First of all, there is a difference between saying you honestly disagree with someone (or someone's administration), and making false claims to get someone he supports elected. Ted Kennedy (and John Kerry too) has access to the same information, yet sees nothing wrong with making inciteful remarks. There is a difference also between being the loyal opposition and attempting to UNDERMINE the government.

Ted Kennedy said that this was Bush's Vietnam. Let's look at some differences: In Iraq, the United States captured the country and remains in control. In Vietnam, over 50,000 American lives were lost. In Iraq so far, 610. While every death is a tragedy, it is worth pointing out the total to discredit Senator Kennedy's assertion. What angers me is that Kennedy's remarks aren't just broadcast here, they are broadcast to be heard by our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines in IRAQ! Is he intentionally trying to demoralize our troops, giving the enemy the idea that their cause is just, increasing enemy morale? Wouldn't that fall under "giving aid and comfort to the enemy?" A dictionary definition says that treason is: "The offense of attempting to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance, or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power; disloyalty; treachery."

John Kerry has stated the need for "regime change" and Ted Kennedy making statements such as these. There is a difference between free speech and lying. There is a difference between free speech and saying whatever it takes to get someone else elected.

One problem many Americans (and many people around the world) have is the inability to see the big picture. They do not research all that is going on, often due to time, and instead hear soundbites. In other words, their opinions are formulated based on a few keywords. I think that Kennedy (and Kerry by extension) is hoping that this speech formulates peoples opinion, never mind that the words are 1) false and 2) possibly treasonous.

As I stated at the top, it is one thing to say that you honestly disagree. It is another to make false statements to try and overthrow a government, and, by extension, put our troops in harms way.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
and here I thought TK was smarter then that. When will people stop saying Iraqi is like Vietnam? The two situations are not even close to resembling each other. And we do a disservice to both situations in equating the two.

I wouldn’t call it treason, stupid is more like it.


nothing will ever get done in this world, if we keep playing the game this way. I am very disappointed with the left these days.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
Here are some people's thoughts on the Vietnam comparison:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentSe...ol=968705899037

It appears that there are similarities and dissimilarities.

Treason? No. Campaigning? Yes. I don't know a political campaign that doesn't employ sound bites like this. Big deal. As for the assertion that some people hear only the sound bites and decide their vote on them, every candidate counts on that very truth to some degree.

Edit:
I forgot to add, the Democrats and Republicans will both campaign and our soldiers will hear them. That's just the way it is, not the goal.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

Senator Kennedy says some pretty inflamatory things - I think he was the guy who suggested the congress impreach President Bush a couple of years ago - ?

Generally speaking, I agree with most of Senator Kennedy's criticism of the Bush administration - just not necessarily his methods.

If President Bush was hoping to buy a friend by holding hands with Senator Kennedy as he flushed billions of dollars into an intransigent bureaucracy (education), he miscalculated. If he (Bush) was just hoping to flush billions of dollars into an intransigent bureaucracy - mission accomplished!
| Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
ImpulseEngine
Apr 6 2004, 11:31 AM
Here are some people's thoughts on the Vietnam comparison:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentSe...ol=968705899037

It appears that there are similarities and dissimilarities. 

Treason?  No.  Campaigning?  Yes.  I don't know a political campaign that doesn't employ sound bites like this.  Big deal.  As for the assertion that some people hear only the sound bites and decide their vote on them, every candidate counts on that very truth to some degree.

Edit:
I forgot to add, the Democrats and Republicans will both campaign and our soldiers will hear them.  That's just the way it is, not the goal.

Where do you draw the line between campaigning and lying?

Why can't Kennedy/Kerry come out and say "vote for our side for this reason"?

This is more than just a "big deal" comment. Never has the rhetoric been so flailing.

I forgot to ask... why is it that you had a link to a CANADIAN paper? The Toronto "Red" Star?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
ImpulseEngine
Apr 6 2004, 04:31 PM
Here are some people's thoughts on the Vietnam comparison:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentSe...ol=968705899037


Charles' response is explainable, but Fred's ... :no: :no:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
Quote:
 
Where do you draw the line between campaigning and lying?

Ever hear the term "puffing" as it relates to advertising? Essentially, it's allowable exaggeration. That's how I see this. Campaigning, after all, is sales to some degree - not literally, but in the same sense as "selling yourself" in a job interview. There's no lying going on here.

Quote:
 
Why can't Kennedy/Kerry come out and say "vote for our side for this reason"?

He does to some degree, but I agree he needs to do more of it. So does Bush. And it's also still early in the campaign for both sides.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
ImpulseEngine
Apr 6 2004, 11:51 AM
Quote:
 
Where do you draw the line between campaigning and lying?

Ever hear the term "puffing" as it relates to advertising? Essentially, it's allowable exaggeration. That's how I see this. Campaigning, after all, is sales to some degree - not literally, but in the same sense as "selling yourself" in a job interview. There's no lying going on here.

Quote:
 
Why can't Kennedy/Kerry come out and say "vote for our side for this reason"?

He does to some degree, but I agree he needs to do more of it. So does Bush. And it's also still early in the campaign for both sides.

Once again, there are differences between exaggeration and outright lying. Kerry/Kennedy crossed the line a few months ago.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
Wichita
Apr 6 2004, 12:48 PM
ImpulseEngine
Apr 6 2004, 04:31 PM
Here are some people's thoughts on the Vietnam comparison:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentSe...ol=968705899037


Charles' response is explainable, but Fred's ... :no: :no:

I'm not saying that I agree with every last one there, just that there are valid arguments. These probably aren't even the best ones. I chose it because a few points were made neatly for both sides in this single article so it was convenient. I'm sure, if I spend time looking, I can find better ones. But I don't think I need to just to make the point.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Sorry IE I read your link, and there is not one good example that objective shows how Iraqi it like Vietnam.

A few tried to say that the out come of Iraqi and Vietnam would be similar. But since Iraqi is not yet over they are pore examples.

What “on this day” equates Iraqi with Vietnam. Other then its an unpopular war on the left?


Let me put it to you this way, using the very bad examples in your link as a guide. I can equate Iraqi to WW2, Since the out come of WW2 was favorable I guess Iraqi's out come will be favorable. right?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
Ted Kennedy comes out and makes an arse out of himself regularly. This is Massachuset's gift to the country. It is just something to laugh at, and not get worked up about. I can't believe that too many people take him seriously anymore. I can't remember the last time I heard him say anything that made sense.

I just don't want another gift from Massachusets (pronounced Tax-achusets). ;)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Fesarius
Member Avatar
Admiral
I had a lot of respect for JFK and RFK. But, I haven't really respected Ted Kennedy since the reports following Mary Jo Kopechne's death. So, my comments would be undeniably biased.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
Admiralbill_gomec
Apr 6 2004, 12:52 PM
Once again, there are differences between exaggeration and outright lying. Kerry/Kennedy crossed the line a few months ago.

A few months ago? I don't know what comments you're referring to exactly, but I'm not aware of any outright lying.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Some good news from our Polish allies:

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040406124001.4785723m.html

Basically, Poland is keeping its troops in Iraq because they believe in building a democracy there.

I'm surprised Houston's Daily Pravda printed this:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/e...outlook/2487509

The title is, "A soldier assures us: Our progress is amazing"

Read for yourself.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
Dandandat
Apr 6 2004, 12:54 PM
Sorry IE I read your link, and there is not one good example that objective shows how Iraqi it like Vietnam.

As I said to Wichita, they aren't the best examples, but there's enough there to open the door of arguability and that's all that's necessary to remove the accusation of lying. I don't have time to find better links right now. Gotta go take my daughter to a doctor's appointment in a few minutes. Maybe I'll find better ones later tonight. (But I might also use that time to watch DS9.)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus