John KERRY Debates John O'NEIL, from 1971, on C-SPAN @ 6PM EST

[Placebo]

John Kerry and John O'Neil (of the current 'Swift Boat Veterans for Truth' and author of 'Unfit for Command') debate U.S. Involvement in the Vietnam War on a 1971 edition of the "Dick Cavett Show".

This is a CLASSIC folks! I hope y'all tune in if you can! :party:

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

1. It's funny,

C-SPAN showed that waaaaay back after it was pretty clear Kerry was going to be the nominee, but long before the primaries were over (February?). I watched the entire thing and it was FASCINATING.

I didn't know at the time how much of a shithead O'Neill would turn out to be, but I remember being greatly impressed that Kerry was that knowledgeable and well-spoken at the age of **27**.

Looking forward to seeing it again.

[Reverend_Smitty]

2. I recommend anyone who hasn't seen it, to watch it!

I saw this program a few months ago. You get a good insight into the Vietnam war and you also get political debate PT (pre-Tweety) which means both party's don't yell over each other and it remains a civil debate...Oh and Kerry kicks O'Neil's ass!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

3. O'Neil just keeps trying to bait Kerry into losing his cool

with personal insults, and Kerry refuses to take the bait, instead, focusing on the issues.


It's like deja vu all over again.

[Placebo]

4. bump

:)

[volosong]

5. Kerry's War Record

All the Republican crap and accusations about Kerry's war record. We should ignore them and refuse to answer.


There is one question, when it comes to the military records of the two candidates than we have to ask and ask often:

WHERE WAS GEORGE?


That should be our battle cry....WHERE WAS GEORGE?

[buycitgo]

6. thanks! taping

how HIDEOUSLY that pig has aged

he looks like a little schoolboy, straight out of Ripping Yarns

now look at him, bloated, jabba the hutlike, bad rug, blinky-eyed, DENYING he even voted for Bush!

what utter scum

[Placebo]

7. He just called Kerry a "little man"...

um, he is taller than you o'neil...

and today he is a bigger man in EVERY way then you will ever be :nopity:

[buycitgo]

8. just turned it on.....who was getting BOOED before the Calgon?

was it ONeill.....I hope

and do you think ON will talk about Kerry's MEDALS at all?

ha

[Placebo]

9. Indeed it was O'Neil getting Booed

:party:

[buycitgo]

11. hahahaha.............

and WHITE sox?

[JI7]

10. it will be repeated about 2 more times today also

for those who miss it right now.

[Placebo]

12. All O'Neil Does Is Attack Kerry Personally...

Some things never change.

[Placebo]

13. I love the way they used to cut away for ads...

its hillarious to see the host hold up the product and say a little ad line :P

[JI7]

14. when i saw this earlier this year i thought it was a joke

i thought it was some comedy skit he was doing . i had to laugh. and it's also funny because the guests are just sitting there .

but i guess that's the way it was in those days so it wasn't unusual for them.

[Julien Sorel]

15. I'm going to dissent a little, and say

that O'Neil is holding his own. But Kerry is making him look a little foolish at times, and O'Neil obviously gets pissed when the audience laughs at him, even though they also laugh at Kerry every once in a while. But O'Neil obviously has a thin skin. And of course, history proved Kerry right. Some people can never get over that.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

16. Well he's stubborn, and if by

'holding his own', you mean he doesn't let the facts keep him from repeating his baseless personal attacks, I agree with you.

[Julien Sorel]

20. He does more than make personal attacks.

I'm an amateur Vietnam scholar, and I assure you, he knows his stuff, and brings up some valid points. They were more valid in those days, when people believed in things like Vietnamization, and the depth of destruction we visited on Vietnam was not widely known. He does best when he stays away from the personal attacks, and sticks to the broader debate.

It is obvious he has an intense personal dislike of Kerry, and it hurts him with the audience.

[buycitgo]

21. examples, please?

thx

I'm taping, and will watch later, so I'll check on that, too

WIDELY known destruction is the key there, but by 1971, it was out there, but the media were just as bad then, for the most part, and actively helped cover up the major policy failures of both LBJ and Nixon, as well as their lies

what did them in was TV......all those bodies being shown at the dinner table.....THAT, more than anything else, is hat turned the tide

just as the Abu Ghraib fiasco, if revealed in its entirety, would bring out the pitchforks and torches onto the WH lawn

but, it looks as if we're only going to READ about the child torture, not SEE it, as we did the body bags and mutilated corpses during the late 60s

no Tet on TV for us

[Julien Sorel]

24. Kerry closed out much stronger, and won in the end, I thought.

As for examples, O'Neil did quite well when denying he, or Kerry, had witnessed war crimes. Kerry talked about burned out huts and villages; O'Neil claimed they had been used as ambush sites. Americans would rather believe O'Neil's argument, and in fact, I think they applauded him for his response to Kerry's war crime charge.

He did well in contrasting his 18 months in-country, with Kerry's four months.

He did well in championing Vietnamization. Again, we know now it failed, but back then, no one could say for sure -- you had knowledgeable people on both sides of the issue, and a lot of Americans didn't like the idea of losing a war. Vietnamization seemed like a face-saving move. One of Kerry's arguments against Vietnamization, by the way, is a little silly. He says that Vietnamization isn't peace, but a continuation of the war. But of course it was! Should the U.S. have unilaterally negotiated a peace treaty, not just on behalf of itself, but on behalf of the South Vietnamese as well? A little presumptive.

He actually turned the Pentagon Papers around, and used them first, and in his favor. That was pretty smart.

There were a couple of other times when he got support from the audience, or got them to laugh at Kerry. Overall, he did OK -- he was pretty impressive for a 25 year old, just as Kerry was impressive for a 27 year old. He was a little too intense, and his dislike of Kerry was palpable, and a little weird.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

33. " Americans would rather believe "

What people would rather believe is not the standard I would use. Kerry got O'Neill to admit the reality that villages were burned out, he got O'Neill to admit that he participated in free fire zones where he may have killed innocent women and children.

On Vietnamzation, I have no idea what your point is -- O'Neill was wrong, but because a lot of Americans were willing to sacrifice innocent lives for false pride, it doesn't matter? :wtf:

He actually turned the Pentagon Papers around, and used them first, and in his favor.

Wtf are you talking about?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

23. Well, here's the transcript, which of his points do you think are valid?

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=KerryONeill

[wndycty]

17. Is this live or tapped. . .

. . .just kidding.

[Mick Knox]

18. Kerry doing pretty well

Oneill is holding his own on some points and Kerry was wrong about POW's not being returned... he was right about Vietnamization not working. Both wrong about South Vietnam surviving as a government.

[jonnyblitz]

19. this is the best thing I have seen on tv in some time.

totally cool as shit . Kerry is awesome!! that accent. he "CAHNT"....I only have a few pages left to read in "tour of duty" by douglas brinkley which all ties into this...

[EstimatedProphet]

22. O'Neill just wouldn't shut up, would he?

Even Cavett made a comment about it.
I find it annoying when someone makes accusations and then won't allow people to answer them. Clearly they don't want them answered.

[ruggerson]

25. The Most Interesting Thing About This Debate

Is that O'Neill says NOTHING, NADA about all the personal charges they now make about Kerry's behavior while in Vietnam.

If what they're saying now, thirty five years later, is true, then why weren't they saying it back then when they could have discredited him very easily and when their memories of these supposed events were much fresher?

ANSWER: They're making them all up. It's total fiction. Thirty five years later, after being unable to discredit him on the issues, and since his political career took off *and* he was right about Vietnam, they NOW have to resort to lying about his service record in a pathetic attempt to discredit him.

And this debate, from 1971, proves that they are lying today.

Smearboats for Bush have just been dealt a death blow by C-Span.

[CaTeacher]

26. I hope EVERY voter sees this debate!

It presents Kerry the way I like to see him--an anti-war activist who has learned from his mistakes.

This side of him is much more appealing than the rah-rah wave the flag and win the war side that was presented at the convention.

I want to see more of the peace-loving Kerry! This is a Kerry I can enthusiastically support instead of reluctantly!

[Zorra]

27. Here is an apparent transcript:

Note: This transcript is from a RW website, and may not be accurate.

http://www.seanrobins.com/kerry/kerry_1971_06_30_Dick_Cavett.htm

In retrospect, it is obvious that John Kerry was correct, and John O'Neill was dead wrong. If the US had pulled out of Vietnam in 1971, hundreds of thousands of lives would not have been lost.

End of story.

Casualties
Estimating the number killed in the conflict is extremely difficult. Official records are hard to find or nonexistent and many of those killed were literally blasted to pieces by bombing. For many years the North Vietnamese suppressed the true number of their casualties for propaganda purposes. It is also difficult to say exactly what counts as a "Vietnam war casualty"; people are still being killed today by unexploded ordinance, particularly cluster bomblets. Environmental effects from chemical agents and the colossal social problems caused by a devastated country with so many dead surely caused many more lives to be shortened. In addition, the Khmer Rouge would probably not have come into power and committed their slaughters without the destabilization of the war, particularly of the American bombing campaigns to 'clear out the sanctuaries' in Cambodia.

The lowest casualty estimates, based on the now-renounced North Vietnamese statements, are around 1.5 million Vietnamese killed. Vietnam released figures on April 3, 1995 that a total of one million Vietnamese combatants and four million civilians were killed in the war. The accuracy of these figures has generally not been challenged. 58,226 American soldiers also died in the war or are missing in action. Australia lost almost 500 of the 47,000 troops they had deployed to Vietnam and New Zealand lost 38 soldiers.

http://united-states.asinah.net/american-encyclopedia/wikipedia/v/vi/vietnam_war.html

The Vietnam War, it seems, was based on a huge "mistake":

Apparently mistaking the Maddox for South Vietnamese, three North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched a torpedo and machine gun attack on her. Responding immediately to the attack, and with the help of air support from the nearby carrier USS Ticonderoga, the Maddox destroyed one of the attacking boats and damaged the other two. The Maddox, suffering only superficial damage by a single 14.5-millimeter machine gun bullet, retired to South Vietnamese waters, where she was joined by the USS C. Turner Joy.

On August 3, GVN again attacked North Vietnam; the Rhon River estuary and the Vinh Sonh radar installation were bombarded under cover of darkness.

On August 4, a new DESOTO patrol to North Vietnam coast was launched, with the Maddox and the C. Turner Joy. The latter got radar signals that they believed to be another attack by the North Vietnamese. For some two hours the ships fired on radar targets and maneuvered vigorously amid electronic and visual reports of torpedoes. Later, Captain John J. Herrick admitted that it was nothing more than an "overeager sonarman" who "was hearing ship's own propeller beat."

The U.S. Senate then approved the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution on August 7, 1964, which gave broad support to President Johnson to escalate U.S. involvement in the war "as the President shall determine". In a televised address Johnson claimed that "the challenge that we face in South-East Asia today is the same challenge that we have faced with courage and that we have met with strength in Greece and Turkey, in Berlin and Korea, in Lebanon and in Cuba," a dangerous mis-reading of the politics of the Vietnamese conflict. National Security Council members, including Robert McNamara, Dean Rusk, and Maxwell Taylor agreed on November 28, 1964 to recommend that President Johnson adopt a plan for a two-stage escalation of bombing in North Vietnam.

http://united-states.asinah.net/american-encyclopedia/wikipedia/v/vi/vietnam_war.html

The invasion of and attempted occupation Iraq is also based on a huge "mistake".

How many more people will die in Iraq because of Bu$h's personal decision to invade Iraq because of mythical WMD?

[CaTeacher]

30. actually, didn't

more than a million die after we pulled out? I was taught that as many as 2 million died in Cambodia alone. Watch the movie "The Killing Fields" supposedly it is based on the true story. What happened in Cambodia after we left makes makes Nazi Germany look like a day at the beach.

One of my colleges has worked with several Cambodian women--who have nothing physically wrong with them--but they are blind--they quite honestly cannot see a thing--but nothing is wrong physically. His theory is that these poor women have seen so much horror that something in their brain actually turned off--to protect them so that they can not see anything else.

I know that I once read a book by the man who was an Ambassador in the region at that time (I can't remember his name at the moment--an LBJ appointee from Texas). He said that the only time he felt ashamed to be an American was when he got on the plane to leave those people to their fate. It made me cry at the time when I read his tale of all the people trying to grab hold of him and begging him to stay as he tried to board one of the last airplanes out of the region. He wrote that they still haunt him in his sleep--crying and groveling--please don't let America leave---please stay--please protect us--please take us with you--please don't leave us--we will get killed if you leave us....and of course many of them did. He wrote that he still has a deep guilt, because even at the time, he was fully aware of what would probably happen to those people.

But--I have nothing personal against the communist regime--and although I deplore the fact that so much loss of life occurred, perhaps these deaths were necessary to put down insurgency so that the communists could have peace in their country. It very well may have been a direct result of the trouble we started in the first place. No matter what happened after we left--we were dead wrong to try to contain and repress the spread of communism. We had no business interfering in sovereign countries--then or now. Kerry was right---and history shows it.

[kentuck]

28. I watched it and ....

I thought it noteworthy how the audience was almost all on Kerry's side. I think that would be difficult to find that situation today? Also, I didn't hear O'Neill say anything about Purple Hearts or superficial wounds??

[cynatnite]

29. White Socks

Those horrid socks did it for me :puke:


Cyn:)

[Spiffarino]

31. Kerry came out on top, hands down

O'Neill may have been knowledgeable on some issues, but he rendered it moot with his relentless interruptions, his whiny "may I answer that, sir" he thrust into every lull in the conversation, his obvious hatred of Kerry, and his unbelievably shifty eyes.

Kerry kept wanting to return to the issues; O'Neill kept throwing out personal jabs. For instance, he kept mentioning Kerry's 4 months vs. his 18 months in VN (which he later changed to 12 months causing me to laugh out loud). He kept using "the other side" referring to VVAW, and he constantly insinuated that he was being interrupted. It was apparent that Cavett was sick of him by the end of the show.

Watch O'Neill now if you get a chance. He hasn't changed his style one bit. He still whines, baits, and shifts the subject. His body language is still that of a compulsive liar. It is truly remarkable how resistant he has been to evolution.

[graywarrior]

32. I remember that debate and I remember the anti war mood...

of the country at that time. Most of us despised O'Neill back then, too. His attacks on Kerry were always personal, which made him less effective with his point. Kerry ligitmized the antiwar movement that had been underway for some time before he spoke out. He has alway been a highly skilled, intuitive politician. O'Neill is a little brat, still.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.