Subject:
|
From Vietnam to Jesse Helms (Re: More on Palestine)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 Oct 2001 17:29:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
560 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Simpson writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes:
>
> > Even regardless of the innocent people who get killed, who have nothing to
> > do with nothing? Goals, shmoals, the bottom line is there used to be such a
> > thing as chivalry. The movie "The Patriot" pointed that out and it is as
> > true then as it is now. The "anything goes in war" mentality applies to
> > terrorists and cowards. It is very easy to kill defenseless women and
> > children, there's no bravery, heroism, patriotism or honor in that. If
> > anyone thinks there is, I suggest they talk to a Vietnam vet sometime.
>
> I have spoken to a Vietnam Vet; last night in fact; I have a special word for
> him; I call him Dad. And you know what? Dad *never* killed defenseless women
> and children in Vietnam. I take extreme umbrage with your statement. That was
> a horrible war, but fought honorably and bravely by the vast majority of
> Americans (and others - my dad has never been an American citizen, but fought
> for the U.S. Army) who went to Hell out of no choice of their own. I find it
> insulting to the hundreds of thousands of honorable Vietnam servicemen still
> with us. Perhaps *you* should talk to some Vietnam Vets and/or the families of
> the killed, maimed or missing before you dishonor their sacrifices.
I agree, Dan's tarring everyone with a big sticky brush. His general
comments are interesting though. I read this in the Observer yesterday about
Jesse Helms's apparent Amendment to Protect Servicemen From International
Criminal Court:
==+==
An urgent task in the 'war' against terrorism was, said the far-Right
Senator, the undermining of international justice. America must not accept
the jurisdiction of a court for war criminals, even though it was supported
by Britain and every other civilised country. Her military should be free to
take 'any necessary action' - including the deployment armed force - to
'free US soldiers' from its cells.
'Nothing is more important that the safety of our citizens, soldiers and
public servants,' said Helms. 'The terrorist attacks of 11 September have
made that fact all the more obvious.'
==+==
Is there any truth in it? I searched for more on the BBC, but no luck. I
know this is a tough area, we expect our soldiers to do a tough job & stay
within the law.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: More on Palestine
|
| (...) I have spoken to a Vietnam Vet; last night in fact; I have a special word for him; I call him Dad. And you know what? Dad *never* killed defenseless women and children in Vietnam. I take extreme umbrage with your statement. That was a horrible (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
117 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
