Michael Moore Dares to Ask: What's So Heroic About Being Shot Down While Bombing Innocent Civilians

page: 1
30
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+22 more 
posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 04:56 AM
link   

Michael Moore Dares to Ask: What's So Heroic About Being Shot Down While Bombing Innocent Civilians?


story here

John McCain is already using the Vietnam War in his political ads. In doing so, it makes not just what happened to him in Vietnam fair game for discussion, but also what he did to the Vietnamese … I would like to see one brave reporter during the election season ask this simple question of John McCain: "Is it morally right to drop bombs and missiles in a 'heavily populated' area where hundreds, if not thousands, of civilians will perish?"
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 22/8/2008 by budski]

[edit on 22/8/2008 by budski]



+11 more 
posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 04:56 AM
link   
A very interesting and entertaining piece, which also asks a very pertinent question.

John McCain was shot down whilst bombing a heavily populated part of Hanoi (his own description) - so can anyone tell me what IS heroic about that?

I'll go further and ask about his treatment as a POW - if someone was shot down whilst bombing NY, how would citizens react?

Treat the pilot nicely, ask that they don't do it again and send them on their way?

Here is a piece about a former POW who was imprisoned at the same time as Mr McCain:
story

The big question is addressed here.

Does the world want a superpower leader with so much anger and hatred in him.

A leader who was more than prepared to bomb civilian targets, and who has expressed his hatred on more than one occasion for those who imprisoned him.

As a UK citizen, the thought of this man becoming the next president fills me with dread - I'm not sure if he'd be worsh than bush/cheney, but I really don't want to find out.

Story here
(visit the link for the full news article)

Editted both posts to fix links

[edit on 22/8/2008 by budski]



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 



I guess they are pertinent questions but I’d go much further and ask what is the US/UK doing with their armies in another country anyway? Is it to protect the US/UK from ………….?

As to you being worried about who the next US president will be? I’m assuming that your tongue is firmly attached to the inside of your cheek because you know very well that no US President will actually do anything that isn’t already decided that they will do by those that put them into these positions?



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 05:18 AM
link   
reply to post by mlmijyd
 


Well, the UK is in other countries because bush wagged his finger and blair came running - despite the fact he knew the WMD story was a load of hogwash.

Blair was always bush's poodle, and that's why we're there.

Amongst other things.

I'm actually hoping that if obama is elected he'll be strong enough to say no when it comes to senseless war - but I ain't holding my breath...



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by budski
The big question is addressed here.

Does the world want a superpower leader with so much anger and hatred in him.

A leader who was more than prepared to bomb civilian targets, and who has expressed his hatred on more than one occasion for those who imprisoned him.


When did he express that hatred?

McCain has been back to Saigon and met the man who pulled him from the lake.

As for "those who imprisoned him", that's a fairly short list. Given what he suffered, I'd probably hate the same short list of people equally. The question you have to ask is: "where are they now?" I'll bet the answer will by largely unsatisfying for you.

As for the bit about a "leader prepared to"...

Ike was prepared to sacrifice millions of Allied soldiers and his command (Supreme Command) included forces that fire-bombed Hamburg.

W, however, wasn't prepared to risk his own arse at all but has had no compunction in sending thousands of others to their deaths. I'd suggest that a list of the best US Presidents ever would have a relatively high proportion of combat veterans on it. Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, Grant, Roosevelt, Truman, Ike...would be a good start.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by HowlrunnerIV
 



Arizona Sen. John McCain refused to apologize yesterday for his use of a racial slur to condemn the North Vietnamese prison guards who tortured and held him captive during the war.
"I hate the gooks," McCain said yesterday in response to a question from reporters aboard his campaign bus. "I will hate them as long as I live."

McCain, a former Navy pilot who spent five years in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp, was questioned about the language because of a story last month in the Nation magazine reporting his continued use of the slur.

source

Does this answer your question?
BTW I don't buy into that bullplop about how he was only talking about his guards - that particular about face only came about when he was being touted as a candidate.

I'd suggest that the vietnamese had far more reason to hate him,and that he was lucky they showed such restraint.

The comparison between WWII and vietnam is not a good one - vietnam had done nothing to the US or anyone else.

Domino theory my backside...

[edit on 22/8/2008 by budski]


+4 more 
posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 05:58 AM
link   
What Michael Moore should be asking is, "why does anyone even care what I think?"

I'm not surprised that this fat blob doesn't consider anyone heroic who isn't serving him pork chops. I am an Obama supporter but am now considering voting for McCain in the hopes that a McCain victory will cause Moore to suffer a massive heart attack.

Ok, I'm not serious about that last part but you get my point.

Look, I happen to believe those who are willing to defend one's country are heroic. They didn't make the policy. They don't get to choose the actions they take. They are simply doing their jobs and because they do, the citizens of their country can feel safe (except the paranoids who hide under the bed because they see govt conspiracies at every turn.

As George Orwell wrote:




People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because brave men stand ready to do violence on their behalf


It's easy to sit behind a keyboard and express our opinions. Most of us can feel safe in doing so. We can thank those who serve to protect us for that.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Not much love for MM, but his question does pose some thought.

Too risque of a question, I think not (of course everyone wants to keep their jobs).

The way I read this is that Mccain's 'War Heroism' should be taken off the table as a tool for his candidacy, if not, it is open to discussion and criticism like everything else in an election.


Personally,
I think many veterans of Vietnam had to do many things they never expected to do, and would probably do them again today (Iraq) if ordered.

As much as I would like to condemn McCain for his actions during the war, I believe it should all fall back on the decision makers that put him and all the others in that position.

I feel for the VN vets as well as I do, and will, feel for the Iraq/Afghanistan vets.

We hear all too often about the atrocities committed and the 'Bad Apples' that destroy the nature of the purposed conflict, this will never change but we should relish in the fact of all the others who go to war and do their jobs well, they are still ALL under the same commands.




I don't think I ever heard of a 'Nice War'.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:06 AM
link   
The comparison was just fine.

Nazi Germany had done nothing to the US, either. And in case you've forgotten your history, that's who Ike was fighting.

"The day that will live in infamy" was perpetrated by the Japanese, not the Germans. That particular war was prosecuted by Nimitz and the walking-ego Macarthur.

How many bombing raids had John McCain flown prior to being shot down? Your argument gets thinner as the veiwing gets closer.

John McCain was flying an Skyhawk, not a Stratofortress; so just how many civilian deaths was he responsible for? In his hours of combat?

The Vietnamese very nearly did kill him at the point of capture. He was bashed and bayoneted. He then spent five-and-a-half years in captivity that, once again, did not meet the Geneva Convention. He was denied medical care as mandated by the Geneva Convention, he was tortured, as strictly prohibited by the Geneva Convention. For six years.

Tell me, had he been a prisoner on the Burma-Thai Railway, would you berate him for the use of the words "Jap" or "Nip"?

Well those men (and there is zero disrespect here) were imprisoned for four years and worked to death, not individually tortured for their "military/political" connections.

McCain had his own guest room and individualised exercise programme at the Hanoi Hilton.

McCain and Kerry were basically responsible for the US extending diplomatic relations to VN.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Night Watchman
 


Micheal Moore is one of the few americans that is trying to save them from themselves. Sure, he is prone to sensationalist pranks, but his heart, and his socioeconomic philosophy, is in the right place. The country is going down the tube and it would be nice not to shoot the messenger.

As for the thread: ex military usually make crap statesmen, I have no idea why people would vote a guy who has spent such a large part of his life in a hierarchical authoritarian structure into a democratic framework. It makes no sense.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Night Watchman
 


I take your point, BUT how was mcCain defending his country?

What danger or threat did vietnam pose to the US?

The domino theory was just so much fecal matter.

It was a war of aggression designed to keep making money for the military industrial complex - this was the single biggest lesson the US learned in WWII, that war makes money for a select few who have the power.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:15 AM
link   
reply to post by HowlrunnerIV
 


Re-writing history a little there aren't we?

Nazi germany was attacking a US ally, and was an ally of a country which attacked the US.

Any bombing of germany also pales into insignificance when compared to hiroshima and nagasaki.

Any way, to get back on topic - mcCain WAS bombing civilian targets when he was shot down, regardless of what he was flying or how many times he'd done it.

I'll ask the question again - if a foreign pilot was shot down after bombing a major US city, do you think they would survive, even if they landed safely?

IMO the answer is a resounding NO.

McCain also condones the torture in Iraq and gitmo - he hasn't spoken out against it, so by default he condones it.

How does that sit with the fact he's been tortured himself (something else he exaggerated - the length of time, not the torture)
Is it a case of because he's been through it, then all POW's must go through it?



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:26 AM
link   
Why are we debating the moral issues surrounding the Vietnam War? Why are we trying to smear McCain for his participation in it?


And for those of us who are ignorant, ex. Moore and whatever fool is posting a thread based on his words,


John McCain was bombing a thermal power station when he was shot down.




Collateral damage, maybe. But hundreds or thousands??
The OP should be ashamed.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
The Vietnamese very nearly did kill him at the point of capture. He was bashed and bayoneted. He then spent five-and-a-half years in captivity that, once again, did not meet the Geneva Convention. He was denied medical care as mandated by the Geneva Convention, he was tortured, as strictly prohibited by the Geneva Convention. For six years.

Tell me, had he been a prisoner on the Burma-Thai Railway, would you berate him for the use of the words "Jap" or "Nip"?


For one,

The Japanese treatment of prisoner's in WWII is no comparison to the treatment of US prisoners in Vietnam. The US were treated fairly well in Vietnam compared to WWII & the Japanese regardless of how you look at it.

Secondly, considering the aggression we were purpotrating on the Vietnamese people, to butt into THEIR affairs, and stop THEM from their personal aspiratios of freedom & socialism by "gross force at all costs", I too am surprised they didn't kill Mccain upon capture. But apparently these people kept him alive and others alive for years. I'm not speaking up for them, but during war in a nation like North Vietnam, just to keep POWs alive at all, using up resources and food and water, is considered good treatment.

We can't seem to do that today in 2008 in Iraq and Afghanistan, this freedom loving, democratic nation. We've done many people equally as wrong as Mccain was done in Vietnam during this war on Terror, and the ones that havent been killed in custody or released after being held and tortured for years for absolutely positively no reason, at a cost to the USA financially, are still rotting away inside Guantanamo Bay as I type this.

There's no excuse for Mccain's hatred. As a Christian, he should FORGIVE ALL, even his so-called persecutors. IMO, he shouldn't have been there bombing them, at least JOHN KERRY wasnt afraid to admit that when he came home, but for doing that, he was attacked and lost the potential Presidency in 2004 from people just like Mccain. Beyond this, as a man of as many years as he has under his belt, he should realize by now that there are more important things in life than to harbor feelings of hatred; even people who suffered under the hands of the Japanese in WWII have learned to forgive them and even be friends with them.

But no, here we have the potential next President of the United States, setting the example, drawing the line, creating the standard by showing openly that even in his old age, he has not aquired the wisdom most men have, and has yet to realize the more important lessons about life, the things most old, veteran men, prisoners of war or not, will tell you are the TRUE reasons to live in peace and harmony with your neighbors. Instead, this guy goes flying around calling an entire modern nation "Gooks" and says he openly hates them all, regardless of who they are individually. This is 100% equal to Osama bin-Laden saying he hates all Americans, and even HE can come off more considerate of others' feelings on public video than Mccain, apparently. Guess bin-Laden is more of a PR man .. right ...



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:54 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Which US ally did Nazi Germany attack in 1939?

No? How about 1940? '41?

Oh, right, after Germany declared war on its ally's enemy, suddenly the UK, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway and Poland, not to mention the USSR, were suddenly US allies.

If they were such important allies, why did the US wait two years to defend them?

Sorry, Budski, as much as I love your avatar, your history sucks.

I also strongly suggest you go back and compare the death tolls of Hamburg with Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not to mention Dresden.

In fact, most estimates put the death tolls of Dresden and Nagasaki roughly similar.

And McCain didn't "land safely" and he was very nearly lynched.

As for "civilian targets", is a power station that powers an arms factory a civilian target or a military target? How about one that powers a radar? A bridge that carries troop trains through the capital?

Which are civilian and which are military?

And if the government is waging a war of agression in another country against that country's government, which government infrastructure is not a military target?

And in case you've forgotten, The Republic of Vietnam was a soveriegn nation with its capital in Saigon, and the Republic of Vietnam was where the NVA was doing its fighting, it wasn't defending itself against invasion.

No matter how you slice it.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by runetang
 


Runetag, see above.

As for who suffered what at their captors' hands, suggest you don't start making statements about how the guests of the Hanoi Hilton don't "stack up" in their suffering.

Suggest, instead, that you actually investigate what was done to them.

As I said, one was casual neglect, the other was targeted torture.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by budski
Any bombing of germany also pales into insignificance when compared to hiroshima and nagasaki.


Surely you can back that up with facts?

Oh wait - you can't. You're making things up.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Oh my God....

excuse me while i rid my mouth of this foul taste.....

Look.

John McCain served his country.

I'm an Obama supporter, anyone who knows me, knows that.

But anyone who knows Michael Moore will know how big of a blundering, unintelligent, nonsensical turd he really is.

Michael Moore is the lowest common denominator in "discussing truth" and instead resorts to smears we see from entities in opposition of obama, like "Obama Nation" and "The Obama File"

Michael Moore is an idiot.
There are many other words that more accurately describe his character, but the T&C prohibits them.

"What is heroic about being shot down"??

Nothing.

But what i've come to realize from those who oppose this notion is that its not the act of getting shot down - its the act of "no ill stay here with my comrades" when he was offered a free pass home, but his friends had to stay.

That is the idea that changed MY mind about the situation.

I'm not trying to glorify McCain and put him up on a pedestal worth of worship and praise, because i don't believe that he is - worthy.

But i am saying that idiots sons of #'s like Michael Moore are what is wrong with the Election process as it exists today

I really wish we were able to hold people like Moore accountable for things he says.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Night Watchman
They didn't make the policy. They don't get to choose the actions they take. They are simply doing their jobs and because they do, the citizens of their country can feel safe (except the paranoids who hide under the bed because they see govt conspiracies at every turn.

They CHOOSE to join the armed forces!

These days, when mutually assured destruction means that we'll never have another convential World War, people choose to become soldiers. They know the risks when they sign up and that's their problem. If they're dumb enough to be loaded onto a boat and be lead into a Middle Eastern desert to fight like pawns for bankers and politicians, then remember, it's their choice. I feel absolutely no sympathy for any troops who are deployed overseas. There's nothing heroic in it.

Sensible people would choose to live their lives with their families and stay home with a peaceful life.



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 



I feel absolutely no sympathy for any troops who are deployed overseas. There's nothing heroic in it.


I'll remember you said that in the event America ever comes under enemy fire.

I'll come to your home and see which hole you're hiding in.







top topics
 
30
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join