| 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: |
| Ted Kennedy's Speech: Treason or disagreement? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 6 2004, 11:18 AM (2,091 Views) | |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Apr 11 2004, 11:35 AM Post #136 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
No, I was nine years old. Yet, I also applied to a military academy eight years later when it wasn't considered "cool" to be a member of any branch. I am of the "America, love it or leave it" crowd. I love my country. I swore an oath to defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic. If you don't love your country, WHY LIVE HERE? Is it because you may loathe it but can't live as well as you do somewhere else? Doesn't that border on hypocrisy? If you'll excuse me, we're off to a brunch. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Surok | Apr 11 2004, 12:18 PM Post #137 |
![]()
Ensign
|
I never said I loathe this country. Quite the contrary, in fact. I find it amusingly Archie Bunker-esque that you think anyone who criticizes the policies of their country must be unpatriotic or even treasonous. No, my problem with the "Love it or leave it" crew is that they cannot perceive the concept that loving your country and speaking out against its' actions are not mutually exclusive. It is too often used as a simplistic and wholly inappropriate response against anyone who dares exercise their right to criticise their government. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Fesarius | Apr 11 2004, 12:23 PM Post #138 |
|
Admiral
|
I am very thankful that I live in a country where I can honor those whom have died defending her, as well as exercise my right to free speech when I wish--so long as the latter is tempered with sound judgement, and takes into consideration those who are listening.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Apr 11 2004, 12:32 PM Post #139 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
I didn't ask you what you learned, I asked you to list the problems. Based on your above paragraph, I can reduce that all down to this, one of the problems you saw was no indigenous support. But I really don't see how all that relates to Iraq considering the evidence shows there is more support for America in Iraq amongst average Iraqi's than there is for the Sunni rebels or Sadr's Shia sect. The Kurds and most of Iraqs' educated are solidly on America's side.
Outside of some unthought out extemporanious interview responses, has anyone ever claimed the Islamic fundamentalists would just sit for an Islamic representative-democracy? No, not at all.
By that criteria, Japan, Germany and South Korea are all like Vietnam, so when taken all together, that's 3 wins, 1 loss and Iraq is still in play.
You think we don't have the right or it's not our job to decide who governs unless a threat is imminent or realized ... there was a realized threat in the form of 9-11 and every shot fired at flights over the No Fly Zones were realized threat. Every embassy blown up was an realized threat and the USS Cole was a realized threat. Every single instance of Middle Eastern terrorism against the United States over the past decade, including 9-11, was directly or indirectly tied to American and UN policies, in the form of UNSC resolutions, regarding Iraq.
We don't. We define them by who they are against, not who they are with. In fact, the mujahidin in Afghanistan is a perfect example of this; we didn't help them because they were allied with the West - in fact they were not - we helped them because of who they fought.
Claiming there was a 9-11 conspiracy - claiming Bush stole the White House - claiming Bush is Hitler - claiming Americans in Iraq are mere invaders and occupiers - claiming Iraq is another Vietnam - these claims foisted upon the public by the Bush Bashers are not about "what's good for America", but about election year political power. So many like to compare Hitler to Bush, but if there is any comparison to Hitler and Germany that can be logically made, it is the democrats who are using the tactics and methods of Hitler in an attempt to gain office again. In reading Hitler's fiery rhetoric about betrayer's, you'd be hard pressed to find any equivalent coming out of the Bush White House.
But in examining the rhetoric from the left, the comparisons to Hitler's rhetorical style are everywhere.
Al Gore's speech to the Tennessee Democrats isn't the only example - Howard Dean uttered the same type of rhetoric on a regular basis. John Kerry and Ted Kennedy are uttering the same manner of rhetoric also. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Wichita | Apr 11 2004, 01:27 PM Post #140 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
If you take out the sentence, "Kennedy recognized this early on.", I think I understand your point. With the sentence in, I don't. So what did Kennedy "recognize"? And what was the result of his "recognition"? (Note: I am not agreeing or disagreeing. I am seeking to understand.) |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ImpulseEngine | Apr 11 2004, 02:53 PM Post #141 |
|
Admiral
|
Dwayne, So far, I have been unable to find the exact quote that I am looking for, but this one is very close and should be enough to establish Bush has used these words. It's from this speech. Here's the quote from Bush (bold is mine): Patsy, the American people should know that my administration is determined to find, to get them running and to hunt them down, those who did this to America. Now, I want to remind the American people that the prime suspect's organization is in a lot of countries - it's a widespread organization based upon one thing: terrorizing. They can't stand freedom; they hate what America stands for. So this will be a long campaign, a determined campaign - a campaign that will use the resources of the United States to win. I also came across another similar one, but with no specific reference to a source that I can cite (again, bold is mine): On September 13, [Bush] said of the yet-unidentified enemy, "These people can't stand freedom. They hate our values. They hate what America stands for." |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Apr 11 2004, 03:32 PM Post #142 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
I'm surprised you spent so much time trying to prove this side point of whether or not Pres. Bush said exactly what you claimed he said. The fact is, you have not found Mr. Bush saying exactly what you claimed. Ironically, I did find that exact phrase uttered by the President, but it was said a little less than a week ago. If you were really going to argue against me on this, you'd spend less time trying to prove that Mr. Bush said exactly what you claimed he said, because I in fact agree that Mr. Bush has stated that he thinks the terrorists don't like our freedoms. I would argue that the reason that phrase or version of that phrase sticks in your mind, isn't because the President repeats it ad nauseum, but because the media and the Left have spent a great deal of time reciting those words - often making the implication that the words are disingenuous or so simplistic as to not be true. It's part of the "jingoism" complaints made by many. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Adrian | Apr 11 2004, 06:28 PM Post #143 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Now that I think of it, if critisizing the use military of military force is the threshold for the charge of treason, wouldn't Dwayne and Admiral Bills's critisism of Clinton's use of troops in Kosovo qualify? Those traitorous commie pinkos! Dwayne, the point of the CIA paper was that there were no fundementalist Moslem terrorist links to Sadaam. Which does bring up the problem of who are we fighting against in the "War on Terror"? Is it just against anyone who uses violence to acheive political goals? Does it have no defined goals like the "War on Crime" and the "War on Drugs"? If so, it'll never truly end (like the two examples) and isn't really "win-able". PS The previous comment "traitorous commie pinkos" was intended as satire and should be taken as such. I would never call someone names as it is childish, emotional, and unproductive. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ImpulseEngine | Apr 11 2004, 06:41 PM Post #144 |
|
Admiral
|
Who said I spent much time at all? Believe me, I didn't because I don't have the time to spend. If I did have the time and desire, I WOULD have found the exact quote... You can be really funny sometimes Dwayne! If you haven't noticed, I've been uninvolved with this thread for awhile. I've been very short on time since about Thursday. That's why I'm not arguing the bigger points right now. Oh, and I already provided evidence for the many times Bush has made statements with this same meaning. That's why I remember it. How could anyone paying serious attention possibly forget it? :rolleyes: |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Surok | Apr 11 2004, 06:46 PM Post #145 |
![]()
Ensign
|
It has been reported that Kennedy was provided with intelligence regarding the situation in Vietnam, and deduced that it was a war we could not win for the reasons stated. Many believe he intended to end our involvement based on this but never got the chance, but I don't know if that is accurate. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Apr 11 2004, 06:52 PM Post #146 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
You're opinion is flawed, because you have no idea what my opinion over Kosovo was and is. The fact is, I supported going into Kosovo AND Rawanda, but Clinton was afraid of Africa and we never went into Rawanda. In fact, I think the US ought to find more hotspots that need squelching, and getting to it.
Actually, Saddam was paying Hamas suicide bombers, and Hamas is a fundamentalist organization. There were links. As for the War on Terror - I guess a war against all terrorist organizations with a global reach and the nation-states that sponsor them isn't defined enough for you.
ok |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Wichita | Apr 11 2004, 06:54 PM Post #147 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
I thought that might be what you meant. Clearly the SV government was ineffectual so either Kennedy recognized it, but died too early to do something about it or he didn't care and had another plan. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Adrian | Apr 11 2004, 07:00 PM Post #148 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Dwayne, sorry about the Kosovo comment; I thought it was you. I was mistaken (and lazy, I didn't want to fish through all of those threads searching for who said what). But it's an interesting point,no? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Apr 13 2004, 03:34 PM Post #149 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
There is a HUGE difference between disagreeing with the policy of the administration and some of the claims that have been made. So, calling George Bush a Nazi is just free speech, eh? Calling for "regime change" is just free speech, eh? Puh-leeze. Considering some of the rhetoric out there as treasonous is NOT simplistic, it is based on a code of right and wrong. Conservatives don't believe in the moral relativism that liberals do. There ARE rights and wrongs. Everything ISN'T a shade of gray. Living within the confines of the law, instead of trying to stretch it to its limits is, is not inappropriate. The left has lost its moral compass. Is it fear, or is it just madness? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ds9074 | Apr 13 2004, 03:58 PM Post #150 |
|
Admiral
|
This is getting like a broken record, and I'm getting fed up with it. I'm not refering to this specific thread. Now I think that there ARE rights and wrong. I think sometimes things can be "black and white". I also think there are times when that is an over simplification - hence "shades of grey". Additionally, by US standards at least, my politics are to the left. That doesnt mean I'm morally deficient or like to stretch the limits of the law. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |




2:13 PM Jul 11