John Kerry the Betrayer: Unfit to Command, part 3

[Ned]

BTW, anyone know how old King (Prince) Sihanouk is? He became King in 1941!

[Berzerker]

Berz, it's academic what O'Neill says. Listen to the new ad from the Swiftvets. There one of Kerry's crewmen during December and January '68 call Kerry a liar about Cambodia.

Is O'Neill a liar? He claimed to be in Cambodia too only to deny being there. According to Douglas Brinkley Kerry was in Cambodia in January of '69, a revision of what Brinkley wrote earlier. Maybe Kerry lied, maybe he made the same language mistake O'Neill made, and maybe he was there. I don't know one way or the other, but I will insist on consistency and O'Neill has contradicted himself while accusing Kerry of lying.

Joseph, we were helping the government of Cambodia fight the Khmer Rouge. Rather than use ground forces as in Vietnam, we relied solely on airpower.

It did not work. The commies won anyway.

It is interesting that both Phnom Penh and Saigon fell within days of each other. April 1975 was not a good month for the cause of liberty.

I can't remember where I read it recently, but I read that after the Khmer Rouge won we were helping them against the Vietnamese and it was the Vietnamese who put an end to their reign of terror and China wasn't all that happy with Vietnam for doing so.

[Ned]

Answering my own question:

He is 84 years old.

http://angkor1431.tripod.com/index/id27.html

[Berzerker]

Molly, you have a hard time admitting that your sources are biased. Christopher H?

I respect Christopher Hitchens, if you have something to back that up, present it.

(Later, we did form a quasi aliance with the Khmer against the Vietnamese. But that was really an alliance with Sihanouk who was in alliance with the Khmer against communist Vietnam.)

Hmm... allied with the perpetrators of genocide!!! Holy Sh!t !!!

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ned
Joseph, we were helping the government of Cambodia fight the Khmer Rouge. Rather than use ground forces as in Vietnam, we relied solely on airpower.

It did not work. The commies won anyway.

It is interesting that both Phnom Penh and Saigon fell within days of each other. April 1975 was not a good month for the cause of liberty.

Correction: you were helping the army led coup 'government' of Lon Nol fight the Khmer Rouge.

Your air force's bombing campaign provided effective propaganda and recruitment material for the Khmer Rouge.


Your government's support for the corrupt Lon Nol regime which forced Sihanouk into exile, also meant that thousands of Khmer who still worshipped Sihanouk, respected HIS advice to aid the Khmer Rouge guerillas when he allied with them in exile in Beijing.

They then increased their numbers from the insignificant amount they had prior to 1970, when even Sihanouk's doddery forces had kept them under control, to the peasant army that defeated the army officer's government and military of Lon Nol.

Now if you think that's a good way of defeating a common enemy, I think I won't be signing up for Realpolitik and Military Strategy 101, the Ned Way, thanks.




And did you note, or were you too busy ignoring what's in front of your nose?

Several Americans quoted in my links have explicitly stated that American ground forces operated inside Cambodia secretly and openly, as they also did in Laos.

But carry on rewriting history- I'm sure the sorry tale of Smerican intervention in Southeast Asia could do with another coat of whitewash.

By the way- you weren't fighting for democracy- even Eisenhower's government knew that when they 'assisted' the French Colonial regime:

(Dwight Eisenhower)

'We are voting for the cheapest way that we can to prevent the occurrence of something that would be of a most terrible significance to the United States of America, our security, our power and our ability to get certain things we need from the riches of IndoChinese territory and from Southeast Asia.'

President Eisenhower, 4th August 1953


and this from Secretary of State Dulles:

'It (IndoChina) is rich in many raw materials such as tin, rubber, oil and iron ore.... This area has great stratgeic value... It has major naval bases.'

Dulles, 29th March, 1954

and this from 'U.S. News and World Report', 4th April 1954:

(an article entitled 'Why the U.S. Risks War for IndoChina: It's the Key to Control of All Asia)

'One of the world's richest areas is open to the winner of IndoChina. That's behind the growing U.S. concern.... tin, rubber, rice, key strategic materials are what the war is really about. The U.S. sees it as a place to hold- at any cost.'


Had the U.S. had any sense it would have aided Ho Chi Minh against the French- as was shown in 1979, the enmity between China and Viet Nam is an ancient one, and even now China has designs Viet Nam. Uncle Ho even offered the use of Cam Ranh Bay as a naval base to the Americans, and the U.S. would have had an ally to contain Chinese Communist influence.

The Viet Namese Declaration of Independence even has a very similar ring (when translated into English) to a certain other declaration.

Hardly surpising, because it was modelled on it.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by DanS
The third swiftvet ad is a good one.

www.swiftvets.com

Did the first two ads also only discuss the claimed cambodian mission? This ad is the only swiftboat ad i've actually seen. until this one all I had seen were discussions about the ads. Maybe they aren't getting much air time?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Berzerker


I respect Christopher Hitchens, if you have something to back that up, present it.



Hmm... allied with the perpetrators of genocide!!! Holy Sh!t !!!

I agree, Berz.

All Ned can do is flail uselessly at Hitchens, whose writings about Kissinger's conduct have yet to attract a lawsuit from him- if they are so biased, or untruthful, I'm sure Mr. Kissinger would have no problem proving libel, or slander, since Hitchens has no qualms about repeating the things to Kissinger's doughy face.


And yes, when Viet Nam invaded Kampuchea to put an end to the Year Zero Regime, America supported the Khmer Rouge government.

Not one of the United States' more attractive foreign policy wobbles- to spite Viet Nam and cosy up to China they gave aid and comfort to the begetters of cultural and ethnic genocide.

'Internationally, with strong support from the United States, China and ASEAN, DK continued to retain the Cambodian seat at the United Nations.

As information about DK’s atrocities spread worldwide, the Khmer Rouge became increasingly vilified. In 1982, to restore the credibility of the anti-Vietnamese resistant movements, China, the United States, and ASEAN forced the three movements to form a tri-party coalition government in exile.

The United States, China, and ASEAN did not expect that the resistance movement would be successful in driving the Vietnamese out of Cambodia. However, they were an important instrument for inflicting pressure on Vietnam so that the latter would come to the negotiating table.'

http://www.seasite.niu.edu/khmer/Ledgerwood/Part3.htm

All the way, U. S. A. ......

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Berzerker


When O'Neill said "I was in Cambodia", that was not definitive?

No and I gave you the rationale to describe it as non definitive. That being, that to say you are in Cambodia and then immediately clarifying to say on the border. Thats a statement of proximity. Says volumes to me. What so difficult to understand?

OTOH contrast to Kerry who has defintively stated in Cambodia with intent to show illegality of action and then further claims of within Cambodia 5 miles deep.

No contest.

Remember the source:



Fox & Friends is not a news show and I saw that episode and they didn't know the law.

The law says no coordinating between campaigns and 527s, and coordinating means an association of providing assistance. Kerry asking a member why he was doing this is not coordinating... Ginsberg, Bush's lawyer, providing legal help to them may qualify as coordinating but not in my book. Offering legal advice about what can or vannot be said is not the kind of assistance implied by coordinating.

You obviously missed the part where I was using this to provoke. Regardless, I believe the ruling would have to come down to establish exactly what is meant by "coordinating". One could easily construe interrogating 527's or a member once identified member as a means to negotiate a peace treaty if you will to call of the dogs as one needs to understand themotivations, hence coordination.

[The Mad Monk]

Next thread: http://www.apolyton.com/forums/showt...hreadid=121181