Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@Oct 17 2004, 12:46 PM
Okay now I get it.
John Kerry was not on trial when he went before the Senate. He was not up there accusing anyone in particular. He wasn't testifying against anyone. You are intimating that he was some sort of witness in a criminal trial. He wasn't He was a spokesman for a rather large group of gentleman collectively called "Viet Nam Veterans Against the War".
He was in Viet Nam. He was telling America what was happening in the Viet Nam war. Why? Maybe because he was there and he wanted it to end.
As far as I can tell, he's got two other options when he returns.
1. He can ignore it all, go to law school and pretend nothing was happening and Americans were killing and being killed for no reason.
2. Lie.
Which option is better? Which one makes him more "Presidential"?
|
Or he can tell America about the war without accusing those in Vietnam fighting, of the war.
The War was started by the US Government, he should have accused them more.
War is where people get killed, and without clear evidence i'll say IMO thats the only thing that happened in Vietnam and i won't accuse those that served there of all the atrocities that Kerry said they carried out. Kerry came back and gave the People against Vietnam a fuel to start the fire.
Kerry could have easily lied in front of Congress like many have said he has. And whose to say he hasn't?