With all the issues surrounding the way our current president operates, I'm shocked that anyone would give 2 shits about such a non-issue as this.
I'm kinda surprised at you all. Like there's ONE of you who's never rebelled in a way that pushed the bounds of the law. Whatever happened to the definition of "legal"? I only wonder because it seems as though those in this thread who tear Kerry down over what he did are not fully aware of the definition of the word legal. "Legal" is to be "in conformity with or permitted by law".
Well guess what- legal is legal, and by your own words you've stated he was within the rights and laws of the US. He's not guilty of anything but perhaps poor judgment of the cruelty of the South Vietnamese people. I think we have been shown (9/11) that the random cruelty of human beings will continue to astound, continue to bewilder, and continue to surprise those of us living in a civilised world.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Kerry DID meet with N. Vietnamese leaders on his own, and barely skirting the law for treason. He then did go to congress and accuse US service men of war crimes.
|
And? He was within the law. His actions were not treasonous because he was within the law, so build a giant bridge and get over it already. I'm amazed at how some people must grasp at straws to maintain party support. Also, I seem to remember an incident of allegations of war crimes happening here recently with the iraqi prisoners- are the people who reported these heinous acts also going to come under fire later in life for "accusing servicemen of war crimes"? Propaganda and rhetoric, the whole damn commercial. What a waste of airtime.