Double Standards of some Liberals

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Double Standards of some Liberals
200
Thu, 07-08-2004 - 1:39pm
I thought this was interesting while driving home from work I heard this whole thing. Tell me what you think.



I was listening to the radio the other day and two men were debating in regards to Kerry. The liberal man was holding a sign that read "Kerry-a war hero"...When asked why he believed Kerry to be a war hero he explained his courage in fighting in Vietnam and that alone should qualify him as being a "war hero"...then the conservative asked him if he was going to vote for Kerry and the liberal man said "Definately!" The liberal man brought up the prisoner abuse in Iraq and how those men and women who performed those war crimes by putting underwear over these prisoners head and humiliating them were a disgrace to the country. He was then asked by the other man if he'd ever vote for any of these men or women that performed such acts down the road for President? The liberal man said "heck no". The other man went on to play a tape where Kerry himself in an interview spoke of the atrocities he and fellow militarymen participated in such as burning down Vietnam villages and other activities that were war crimes while in Vietnam. Kerry with his own words and voice admitted such things happened and do happen in a time of war no doubt about it. ( you could hear the audio tape of his interview) The man then asked the sign holding, Kerry supporting, liberal man how he could vote for someone who actually burned down and killed people in their own villages during Vietnam for President but would never consider voting for those who commited war crimes such as humliation in Iraq in the future as President? Does that make Kerry a war hero he asked? The liberal man was at a loss for words. He contradicted himself...he judged these soldiers in Iraq as a "disgrace to their country" but would vote for Kerry for President of the United States of America.

The reason for posting this story was to give a little insight on the double standards some liberals hold for their own and the mind-set the have.

Sorry so long but it's worth the read :)

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 2:26pm
<>

I never said he would have been murdered by a soldier right then and there if he disobeyed an order. I said he could have faced the death penalty. It's all well and good in the middle of a war (where immoral acts are committed on a daily basis) to get on one's moral high horse and disobey orders in the middle of a jungle thosands of miles away from home and risk facing the death penalty (or other severe punnishments) and actually doing it. Rmemeber, sometimes it's hard to draw the line. When is it OK to disobey an order and when is it a treasonable and criminal act?

"A Matter of Life and Death: Examining the Military

Death Penalty's Fairness" by Dwight Sullivan (The Federal Lawyer, June 1998) (reprinted with permssion of author)

Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 15 offenses can be punishable by death, though many of these crimes -- such as desertion or disobeying a superior commissioned officer's orders -- carry the death penalty only in time of war."

more...

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=180&scid=32#overview

Remember, if we are talking about double standards and judging Kerry by his record adn acts he committed in his youth, serving his country, all we have to do is consider what Bush was up to while Kerry was facing this moral dilemna (and losing according to you). I think Bush was wondering if it was Ok to drive drunk (and losing that moral dilemna as well).


Remember, this thread is about double standards.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 2:30pm
In all fairness, let's compare apples with apples..From what I gather (or is at least claimed) those who did the abuse in Iraq were doing it on their own, there was no orders to abuse prisoners, which is why they were being charged.>>

Where did you gather this information? I could have sworn most who agree with your POV have said the opposite and blamed Bush an Co. for such treatment. Are you the exception?

The things described by Kerry, however terrible they were, were orders from above, done by all soldiers.>>

Does it make it any less of a war crime? The list of things he did while at war were quite shocking to be honest. Really sad too.

If it had not, then he would have been charged.>>

So why are the lawyers on the prosecuting side trying to nail Bush and Co. for "ordering" these humiliation treatments? If as you say it was ordered otherwise he would have been charged, then why are they going after Bush? The current soldiers are saying they were ordered to weren't they? So why wasn't Kerry charged then?


Second of all, I think Kerry became a war protestor, so clearly he had regrets and tried to make up for it.>>>

So that makes it ok...you do the crime but say sorry and protest and it makes it ok? Is that what you are saying? Why don't we give the current soldiers some time to say "sorry"? Do you know if they are sorry or not? Maybe they can't make it "clear" they are sorry because they are still on trial.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 2:30pm
richer people tend to be better educated.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 2:38pm

<<In all fairness, let's compare apples with apples..From what I gather (or is at least claimed) those who did the abuse in Iraq were doing it on their own, there was no orders to abuse prisoners, which is why they were being charged. The things described by Kerry, however terrible they were, were orders from above, done by all soldiers.>>


Ah-hah! In your defense of Kerry, you have given lie to

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 2:41pm

Actually Republicans & Democrats are pretty evenly split when it comes to wealth.


That's why

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 3:00pm
<>

I never said he would have been murdered by a soldier right then and there if he disobeyed an order.>>

I didn't say you said they would be murdered right then and there either.

I said he could have faced the death penalty.>>

No you didn't mention the death pernalty until now. But ok.

It's all well and good in the middle of a war (where immoral acts are committed on a daily basis) to get on one's moral high horse and disobey orders in the middle of a jungle thosands of miles away from home and risk facing the death penalty (or other severe punnishments) and actually doing it.>>

So you are saying it does happen in war inevitabley right? Well I could have sworn that was the conservative's reasoning for what happened currently with our current soldiers in Iraq. Does it not apply unless you are actually in the middle of gunfire? I don't think Kerry was actually fighting off the enemy at the particular moment he joined in and acted out those war crimes.


Rmemeber, sometimes it's hard to draw the line. When is it OK to disobey an order and when is it a treasonable and criminal act?>>>

I think that was the point that we were trying to make when the whole Iraqi scandal happened. Does this logic not apply to those soldiers in the Iraqi war, just Kerry and his fellow militarymen in Vietnam?

"A Matter of Life and Death: Examining the Military

Death Penalty's Fairness" by Dwight Sullivan (The Federal Lawyer, June 1998) (reprinted with permssion of author)

Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 15 offenses can be punishable by death, though many of these crimes -- such as desertion or disobeying a superior commissioned officer's orders -- carry the death penalty only in time of war."

more...

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=180&scid=32#overview

Remember, if we are talking about double standards and judging Kerry by his record adn acts he committed in his youth, serving his country, all we have to do is consider what Bush was up to while Kerry was facing this moral dilemna (and losing according to you). I think Bush was wondering if it was Ok to drive drunk (and losing that moral dilemna as well).

Remember, this thread is about double standards.>>

I don't think you are understanding at all...Yes we are talking about double standards but what does Bush having a DUI have do with it? Who is shouting that they are simply voting for Bush because he has the best morals? I am talking about people who don't know enough information before making such broad statements and voting accordingly. I am talking about those who will vote for Kerry simply because he isn't Bush. If you have encountered a situation where someone stated they are voting for Bush because he is moral and not Kerry because he isn't moral, then you'd have yourself a double standard...but until then...you don't. At least not by I.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 3:02pm
Exactly my point to her!!! Thanks for catching that also.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 3:24pm

<>


But a couple of the soldiers at the prison

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 3:28pm
Oy! The last time (of many) you brought up this survey I vowed to find you and affix my college diploma to your butt. Now where's my stapler...
Avatar for tmcgoughy
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-08-2003
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 3:31pm

The first key to wisdom is constant and frequent questioning, for by doubting we are led to question and by questioning we arrive at the truth.  -

Pages