Freedom Fries Flip Flop

[Dexter]

The second she crosses the line from being against our gov't actions and being in support of the enemy troops, she goes from reasonable point of view to being antiUS troops.

[ChadTower]

Thats a hell of an assumption. It ranks up there with bushs "you're either with us or against us" and the old pro-muslim=anti-america. In reality, of course, things aren't that black and white. What about her rights of free speech and expression, or does this only apply to warmongers??

I think once a person has actually gone, shaken the enemy's hand, posed for pictures with the enemy, and spent a day laughing and joking with the enemy, they have made their statement.  It is much farther than your comparison.

Free speech really doesn't excuse it.  Travelling to Vietnam and spending time with the enemy is not speech, it is action.  She could have protested any way she wanted without being in favor of the enemy but the line between protest of your own gov't and support of the enemy was crossed. 

This is morally equivalent to supporting the Iraqi insurgents in their efforts to kill US soldiers.  One may be against the fact that the US soldiers are there but why would one wish them to die?  They are not to blame for the decisions of their superiors.

[KenToad]

Thats a hell of an assumption. It ranks up there with bushs "you're either with us or against us" and the old pro-muslim=anti-america. In reality, of course, things aren't that black and white. What about her rights of free speech and expression, or does this only apply to warmongers??

I think once a person has actually gone, shaken the enemy's hand, posed for pictures with the enemy, and spent a day laughing and joking with the enemy, they have made their statement.  It is much farther than your comparison.

Free speech really doesn't excuse it.  Travelling to Vietnam and spending time with the enemy is not speech, it is action.  She could have protested any way she wanted without being in favor of the enemy but the line between protest of your own gov't and support of the enemy was crossed. 

This is morally equivalent to supporting the Iraqi insurgents in their efforts to kill US soldiers.  One may be against the fact that the US soldiers are there but why would one wish them to die?  They are not to blame for the decisions of their superiors.

Chad, just for clarification, he's asking how you decide who is the "enemy."

Cheers,
KenToad

[patrickl]

Thats a hell of an assumption. It ranks up there with bushs "you're either with us or against us" and the old pro-muslim=anti-america. In reality, of course, things aren't that black and white. What about her rights of free speech and expression, or does this only apply to warmongers??

I think once a person has actually gone, shaken the enemy's hand, posed for pictures with the enemy, and spent a day laughing and joking with the enemy, they have made their statement.

[ChadTower]

The people trying to kill US Soldiers.

[ChadTower]

You are talking about that picture of Rumsfeld with Sadam? Or maybe the ties of the Bush family to the Laden family?

Are these happening in the midst of a conflict between the two?  Did Bin Laden return from killing Americans, meet with Bush, and then go back to killing Americans?

[Dexter]

Travelling to Vietnam and spending time with the enemy is not speech, it is action.

[ChadTower]

Did it ever cross your mind that she did not consider them HER enemy? Surely as a citizen of america her right to choose who she considers friends and foes is protected in the wonderful constution?

It has and as I have said, I DO NOT CARE.  I form my opinions according to my priorities.  I see what she has done, I evaluate it as I see fit, and I see her as a traitor.  It makes no difference to me what she thought she was doing.

Maybe she only considers enemies people who have actually done something on her, instead of being TOLD who her enemy is this particular week? Is this so radical a thought process?

And yet, if she had a loved one under fire by these troops, would she have done it?  Would they be her enemy then?  How should the people who have loved ones who were killed by those troops feel about her actions?  You want to rationalize her feelings.  How about anyone else's?

I can see why right wingers get so upset with people like this. Its in case americans start considering as enemies nations that actually wrong them, instead of nations that no longer do as they're told. An end to perpetual war and the 'defence' contractors who feed on it.

Moron.  I try really, REALLY hard not to insult people during these debates because all it does is undermine one's content.   It always ties back to the defense contractors and one's political views for people who just aren't intelligent enough to step out of that frame of mind.  My position on Fonda has zero to do with politics and everything to do with the fact that she openly supported troops that killed members of my family.

You folks can continue to debate this all you want, I have stated my position more than was necessary.

[Dexter]

Moron.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Dexter,

Moron.

ROTFLMAO!! I see you finally got the spelling right   

I'm sure he learned it from me. I've spelled it out a few times on this board of late.

Chad,

You are talking about that picture of Rumsfeld with Sadam? Or maybe the ties of the Bush family to the Laden family?

Are these happening in the midst of a conflict between the two? Did Bin Laden return from killing Americans, meet with Bush, and then go back to killing Americans?

So Rummy and friends thought these guys were angels then? So offering millions of dollars of support and highly sophisticated training and technology is somehow justifiable and less "supportive of the enemy" next to Fonda's photo-op laugh-a-thon?

My position on Fonda has zero to do with politics and everything to do with the fact that she openly supported troops that killed members of my family.

Fonda offered as much "support" for those "enemy troops" as these mouth-breathers do for our troops with the yellow-ribbon bumper stickers they plaster on their gas-guzzling SUV's. Which is to say, nothing substantial. In fact, I'd say she offered *less* support for enemy than these fuel hogging Chickenhawks. Remember, when you ride alone, you ride with Bin Laden!

This is morally equivalent to supporting the Iraqi insurgents in their efforts to kill US soldiers.

No, it isn't. Meeting with "the enemy" is not an expressly "supportive" action, in and of itself. Her intent was to attempt to stop the killing. She is simply guilty of going about it in a very clumsy manner.

Furthermore, for someone who claims the war in Iraq is a complex end-game positioning of American imperialist power that will not be effected - in the least - by enormously cataclysmic events such as continued urban warfare, potential civil war, and horribly damaging PR snafus such as Abu Gharib and Gitmo Koranic abuses, your sense of how significant a movie starlets ill-planned behavior effected the outcome of any particular action in Vietnam is overly simplistic, and quite frankly, laughable. Might you be biased by your familial subjectivity, and thusly a tad bit unrealistic and unreasonable?

Your argument, as it stands, seems extremely self-centered and your anger seems horribly misguided. However, based on a lot of things you say, I'm going to guess that may not be a problem for you.

How does this equation make sense:

   Fonda ("laughed and joked" with an enemy that never attacked us.)
+ Bush Family (Continues to do business with the enemy that did.)
==============================================
= ChadTower Hates Fonda and supports Bush's action in Iraq (an enemy that never attacked us).

Should it be "multiplied by (Because *he* lost family in Vietnam)"?


mrC

[ChadTower]

[Dartful Dodger]

I just don't see any productive reasoning for sitting around and obsessing over every aspect of his life (e.g. his wife making bad jokes at a dinner party).

Gore lost and he's had a hard time getting over it.

Saying bad things about Bush makes him feel better about putting his faith in two losers.  Sort of like me saying "BUSH WON!!!" makes me feel better about the future of this great country of ours.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Actually, it should all be negated because it is based on a false assumption.  I do not support Bush's action in Iraq.  You seem to be confusing my offering alternate reasoning for support.  I have stated many times that I would rather bring the troops home today and seal our borders than stay there for another day.

I did confuse your reasoning for support. Thanks for clarifying. Still though, forget the equation then (and it's assumption that you support Bush) and my argument still stands, as it addresses your "alternate reasoning". You seem to assign so much import and power to Fonda's actions in Vietnam, yet you argue that things like U.S. abuse of prisoners, and internal strife in Iraq are somehow less significant to the outcome?

You also seem to be so much more angry with her than with the policies that put our men/women there in the first place, and kept them there longer than needed. Scapegoating only leads to the avoidance of the issues, and in turn, allows these very same atrocities to occur...again and again.

I probably don't like Bush a whole lot more than you do.  I just don't see any productive reasoning for sitting around and obsessing over every aspect of his life (e.g. his wife making bad jokes at a dinner party).

'Cuz it's fun. Nothing better to blow off steam as these moronic yahoos in power and the sun-gazing yokels that support them gleefully bareback this country off into oblivlion.

Btw, until you actively participate in an action designed to remove Bush from power (other than voting) and/or hold him accountable for the actions of his administration, then no...you do not dislike Bush more than I do.

EDIT: Case in point, see DD's post above.

[ChadTower]

Geesh, that was three lines when I left, now it's 10x longer.

[Dartful Dodger]

Geesh, that was three lines when I left, now it's 10x longer.

It was modified 3 times within fifteen minutes, each modification I opened the thread hoping he'd written something worth reading.

Maybe in the next revisions.

[danny_galaga]

Oh, and it's not called "arguing".....it's "debating".

[danny_galaga]

p.s.