Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" [View all]Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)31. A couple points, here. One, Kerry said those words on April 22, 1971.
"Very few agreed with Kerry when he spoke those words about the Vietnam War. He was so, so far ahead of his time." -- that's simply not true. Opposition to the Vietnam war was pretty well established, by April of '71, and had been around for a long time. Walter Cronkite came out with his famous editorial (the one that prompted LBJ to say "if I've lost Cronkite, I've lost the war) in Feb of '68- a full 3 years before Kerry said those words. Cronkite was as much a bellweather of mainstream America, as ever existed.
Also, Kerry voted for the IWR. That was one of the big selling points, IIRC, behind his nomination in 2004, odd as such a thing may sound today. The conventional wisdom poop-bahs assured everyone we needed a "strong on terror" nominee, terror apparently meaning going into Iraq for the guy who didn't attack us on 9-11. I think that was a mistake, we would have done better in '04 with a nominee able to take a clear and consistent moral position against the Iraq war at the time.
But to imagine that Kerry from 1971 up to current day has never taken any arguably "hawkish" positions, is simply false.
Maybe you're right. Maybe ISIS is the worst, worst thing ever. ....Which would be an interesting discussion to have, whether or not I was "right" about that, if that remotely resembled anything I've ever said.
Also, Kerry voted for the IWR. That was one of the big selling points, IIRC, behind his nomination in 2004, odd as such a thing may sound today. The conventional wisdom poop-bahs assured everyone we needed a "strong on terror" nominee, terror apparently meaning going into Iraq for the guy who didn't attack us on 9-11. I think that was a mistake, we would have done better in '04 with a nominee able to take a clear and consistent moral position against the Iraq war at the time.
But to imagine that Kerry from 1971 up to current day has never taken any arguably "hawkish" positions, is simply false.
Maybe you're right. Maybe ISIS is the worst, worst thing ever. ....Which would be an interesting discussion to have, whether or not I was "right" about that, if that remotely resembled anything I've ever said.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
71 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I heard an interesting discussion about this recently - about showing the true cost of war.
calimary
Sep 2014
#19
We aren't going to let Iraq collapse, and get chased out of our embassy
TwilightGardener
Sep 2014
#4
That's what I was thinking, as they try to come up with a reason we'll believe to start back up
NightWatcher
Sep 2014
#18
A couple points, here. One, Kerry said those words on April 22, 1971.
Warren DeMontague
Sep 2014
#31
After the chemical attack in Syria he was unbearable. I gave up on him.
Glimmer of Hope
Sep 2014
#22
And didn't bother to notice that he was instrumental in getting rid of the Syrian chemical weapons
karynnj
Sep 2014
#70
It is really difficult to see Dems who fight for the same values consistently...
YvonneCa
Sep 2014
#58
Both those criteria have been met, and significant numbers of Americans dying is unlikely
Donald Ian Rankin
Sep 2014
#54
It's a lot easier than asking thiousands of men after him to die for a mistake.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Sep 2014
#52