Russert Sucks Up To Kennedy
Ted Kennedy appeared on Meet The Press today. For whatever reason, Russert found no need to even try to correct Kennedy on his obvious, intentional misspeaks! From Newsbusters:
The first historical misstatement made by Kennedy was that we have now been in Iraq as long as we were in Korea: “You know, Tim, as of this week, American forces will have been in Iraq as long as America was in the Korean peninsula in the Korean war.” Certainly, any journalist worth his salt would have challenged his guest on this statement, as America more than 50 years later still has troops in Korea. In fact, according to Global Security.org, as many as 67,000 American troops were still in South Korea in 1970, 43,000 in 1991, and 37,000 as recently as October 2004. Today, this number appears to be about 30,000. Yet, Russert chose not to bring this fact to Kennedy’s attention, even when Kennedy reiterated this misstatement later in the interview.
Kennedy’s second unchallenged misstatement came when Russert asked him whether there could be huge consequences to pulling all of America’s troops out of Iraq: “If we got out and there was a civil war, chaos and you saw al Qaeda moving in in record numbers and Zarqawi exerting great control over the country, would you go back in?”
Kennedy responded: “Well, first of all, I heard the same kinds of suggestions at the time of the end of the Vietnam War: ‘the great blood bath. We’re going to have over 100,000 people that were going to be murdered and killed at that time.’ And for those of us that were strongly opposed to the war heard those same kinds of arguments at the time.”
Well, Tim, it would have been nice of you to point out to your guest that an estimated 1.7 million Cambodians were killed by the Khmer Rouge after America pulled out of Vietnam. As such, the great bloodbath that folks were predicting did happen. Mightn’t it have been appropriate to point this out to your guest, Tim?
It appears not.
April 24, 2006 - 06:39 AM on April 24th, 2006
The impression given about America, Cambodia, and the Khmer Rouge is very misleading.
April 24, 2006 - 07:31 AM on April 24th, 2006
Yeah…a little bit of a stretch, but still relevant.
April 24, 2006 - 07:26 PM on April 24th, 2006
TED KENNEDY the liberal blabberer mouth he is a rat and liar:roll:
April 24, 2006 - 10:51 PM on April 24th, 2006
Ted Kennedy could not tell the truth if his life depended on it.
April 24, 2006 - 10:56 PM on April 24th, 2006
The US pull out of south east asia was a disaster for those who lived there. There is a reason why they were literally kicking people off of the skids of the Huey helos flying off the roof of the US Embassy in Saigon. They had airlifted as many people as they could and there were still people trying to get out.
There is a truth about civil wars that few people choose to acknowledge. Whenever there is a civil war the odds of there being atrocities is incredibly large. Look throughout history. The US Civil war was the most “civil” af any civil war and there were still what would now be considered war crimes committed on both sides. In The Balkans there was ethnic cleansing, in Rwanda there was genocide. There’s genocide going on right now in Sudan. During the civil war in South Africa, Winnie Mandela was putting tires full of gasoline around opponents’ necks and lighting the gas. The list of atrocities during civil wars goes on and on. Civil wars are notorious for the heightened emotions on each side. The enemy isn’t just the enemy, they’re seen as subhuman.
Ted is a fool. Were it not for his brothers’ deaths, he’d have drunk himself into an early grave or spent 20 yrs in prison for his actions at Chappaquiddick.
April 25, 2006 - 07:09 AM on April 25th, 2006
yeah, us pulling out of vietnam is what caused my old roommate Que to have to float on sticks and eat bugs in a refugee camp in thailand before finally making it here…nice one.
April 25, 2006 - 10:29 AM on April 25th, 2006
No way…you guys aren’t defending the Vietnam War, are you?
Every school child in the nation, and probably even across the globe is taught that US intervention in Vietnam was a foreign policy disaster, and was the United States first time “losing” a war.
April 25, 2006 - 10:50 AM on April 25th, 2006
I don’t think anyone is defending the Viet Nam war, per se..simply stating that Johnson so mismanaged this thing that it resulted in 20 million people being handed over to communism.
April 25, 2006 - 10:53 AM on April 25th, 2006
“simply stating that Johnson so mismanaged this thing that it resulted in 20 million people being handed over to communism.”
Hmmmm, mismanaged war…. Why oh why does that sound familiar?
April 25, 2006 - 10:55 AM on April 25th, 2006
yeah, one lesson we should have taken from Viet Nam is that… you can rescue those who don’t want to be saved.
I’m still not convinced that the Iraqis didn’t want to be saved from Saddam..time will tell.
where O’ where are the “moderate muslims”????????????
Fucking oxymoron.
April 25, 2006 - 12:38 PM on April 25th, 2006
“Hmmmm, mismanaged war:. Why oh why does that sound familiar?”
Zelda, don’t even bother.
I get, you get…but they just won’t get it.
April 25, 2006 - 01:20 PM on April 25th, 2006
Whatever mismanagement has occurred in the current war, it still = >25 million people liberated, not killed.
Perhaps Liberals prefer the Klintonian “wag the dog” war, where innocent Serbian civilians died as a result of collateral damage, there were ZERO U.S. interests, and the muslim invaders were firmly established at the expense of our WWII allies? Well, at least the Muslims have been very appreciative of it, and have been our new friends, right?
April 25, 2006 - 01:28 PM on April 25th, 2006
Yes, they have robert!!! Unless, of course, you count the dozens of terrorist bombings that the “religion of peace” is responsible for since Billy BJ saved those poor people from the ruthless Serbians.
April 25, 2006 - 02:10 PM on April 25th, 2006
The great majority of the people know that there is nothing wrong with the Muslims that peace can’t fix. After decades of neocon warmongering by the militray-industrial complex, so that greedy corporate robber barons can steal the resources of the thrild world, it is only natural that the Muslims are striking back.
Just visualize WORLD PEACE. It can be so! The problem is you right-wing Neanderthal Neocons! Clinging to outdated, obsolete concepts like American imperialism and Colonialism, all 18th and 19th century concepts!
April 25, 2006 - 11:28 PM on April 25th, 2006
Lenny, San Fran, Et al…. Unfortunately visualizing peace only works when EVERYONE wants it. What you fail to realize is that while Islam is not the cause of the current terrorism problems, radical Islamofascism is. Unless everyone is willing to give up ALL of their freedoms and convert to Wahabist Islam, there will be no peace with these Fanatics. If you haven’t noticed, they’re killing more Muslims than they are Americans. The only other option is to kill them. While you seem to fail to grasp the concept that there are people who simply do not want to make peace with us, there are those of us who do understand that fact.
This religious fanaticism is really not that new, it’s only that in the 20th/21st century religious wars are in fact global and the weapons are substantially more destructive. For a good historical example of religious wars, study the 30 years war. Why is it that given 1600 years, religions based in peace tend to turn on themselves? The resulting religious killings are often horrendous. By comparison to the 30 years war, the sectarian violence in Iraq is minimal. In one city during the 30 yrs war, upon it being taken by one side, the entire population, numbering in the tens of thousands, was herded to the docks on the river, blessed, converted to “the one true faith”, beheaded to prevent them from backsliding, and then dumped into the river. And that was a war of Catholics versus Protestants. Hell it makes the last 100 years in Northern Ireland look like a walk in the park.
As for the Vietnam War being taught as a loss, that is partially correct. It was a political loss, not a military one. While the troops were fighting to win, the politicians were voting to lose. All honest historians will say that had the military been left alone to fight the war, they would’ve won it. After the TET offensive, the US military had the enemy on the ropes. For those who don’t know, the Tet Offensive should be the indication of what we should expect from any potential enemy. We negotiated a cease fire for the Tet Holiday which they then used to plan, prepare for and then execute an attack on our troops who were honoring the cease fire. Those same teachers who would teach that Vietnam was a military loss are those who would proclaim BJ Billy a great hero for reneging on his ROTC commitment and protesting the war in Moscow.
The difference in Iraq is that the commanders are being given all of the troops that they are requesting, and they are getting the necessary equipment as soon as it becomes available. They are also being permitted to order commercially available equipment for in the field testing without going through a lengthy DOD testing program.
April 26, 2006 - 12:22 AM on April 26th, 2006
Start making additions to the discussion rather than insulting those that at least put forth an arguement!
edited by peejz
April 26, 2006 - 05:38 AM on April 26th, 2006
14- Well said FAO, but I have 1 thing to add. The kids at the highschool level are not being taught the Vietnam War at a highschool level..at least here in MI. They touch on the time period, but do not go into any depth on the subject.
April 26, 2006 - 06:27 AM on April 26th, 2006
“Whatever mismanagement has occurred in the current war, it still = >25 million people liberated, not killed.â€
Has it occurred to any of you that the average Iraqi now lives with more terror than they did under Saddam?
April 26, 2006 - 06:33 AM on April 26th, 2006
Zelda…I haven’t been to Iraq myself but I have seen some of the news that’s not mainstream and terror from ordinary Iraqi’s are not what I’m getting. Do tell about your personal experiences. I would love to hear them.
April 26, 2006 - 06:36 AM on April 26th, 2006
Zelda, has it occured to you that they don’t?
April 26, 2006 - 06:55 AM on April 26th, 2006
I have never been to Iraq. But having never been to Iraq doesn’t make my opinion wrong any more than going to Iraq would make someone’s opinion right.
There is a fantasy that seems to be hard for you guys to give up. It’s like a fairy tail where Saddam is gone so everyone lives happily ever after. The reality seems quite different.
Here are some of my sources. I try to get as many different points of view on Iraq as I can. They all have their own particular bias.
A Family in Baghdad
Baghdad Burning
Hammorabi
Healing Iraq
Iraqi Spirit
Raed
The Messopotamian
And of course Where is Raed
April 26, 2006 - 06:56 AM on April 26th, 2006
Zelda, has it occurred to you that they don’t?
The possibility has definitely crossed my mind, but it just doesn’t seem to be the case.
April 26, 2006 - 07:21 AM on April 26th, 2006
Zelda- there are blogs coming out of Iraq as we speak..was that possible under Saddam? Do all agree with the action..probably not, but the majority are thankful for the liberation. They have disruptions in their day to day life, but they are making progress.
April 26, 2006 - 07:55 AM on April 26th, 2006
If increasing the number of blogs coming out of Iraq was our goal then we have been successful.
April 26, 2006 - 08:25 AM on April 26th, 2006
You miss the point Zelda. The point is that msm only reports the bad. There are so many good things coming from Iraq that’s incredible. If you did a little bit of research you would know that. Check out Gary Sinise organization which is helping to supply school children in Iraq. Check out Michael Yon’s news blog and you will be linked to many other places. All of which tell a very different story than what you are hearing on the news channels. Please try to keep an open mind.
April 26, 2006 - 08:46 AM on April 26th, 2006
22-Zelda, are you just trying to present obtuse arguements? The point is that we can both go to Iraqi blogs, something not allowed under Saddam..the people can use their voices to tell the bad as well as the good..Iraq has a growing economy. Businesses are starting up at a rapid rate..was that possible under Saddam? Hell no.
April 26, 2006 - 08:58 AM on April 26th, 2006
“Pease try to keep an open mind.â€
I do. I hope you do as well.
Do you honestly think that I haven’t done any research besides msn?
School supplies for Iraqi children!?? Do you really think such things are of enough significance to override the daily suicide attacks, kidnappings, and murders?
April 26, 2006 - 09:00 AM on April 26th, 2006
When I keep an open mind and read all there is to read and think education is the key, Yes. Yes, Yes, and yes.
April 26, 2006 - 09:01 AM on April 26th, 2006
“are you just trying to present obtuse arguments?â€
No, but I’m beginning to think that you guys are.
April 26, 2006 - 09:05 AM on April 26th, 2006
Zelda, please take a step back and objectively look at what you are arguing. How can you possibly quantify the terror and insecurity of living under Saddam and compare it the terror and uncertainty of what exists now? You can take anecdotal opinions and examples from individuals, but how do you turn that into an overall conclusion?
For those 500,000 or so people found in the mass graves, the answer is clear. For those fed alive into the shredders, the same. For those who have relatives who were arrested and never seen again, or those children found in the prisons, the answer is clear.
At least Iraqis have hope for the future now. Things are getting better. And if it wasn’t for the foreigners coming in, the Al Qaeda people choosing to fight in Iraq, things would be a lot better.
April 26, 2006 - 09:07 AM on April 26th, 2006
You guys think that the US effort in Iraq has been a success.
No amount of cost or violence will likely ever convince you of anything else. You pick and choose your indicators of the quality of life in Iraq to match your preconceived notions that things are improving.
I won’t view our efforts over there as a success until there is a substantial reduction in violence; and then only if there is a sane, reasonable, and effective government.
April 26, 2006 - 09:25 AM on April 26th, 2006
“No amount of cost or violence will likely ever convince you of anything else. You pick and choose your indicators of the quality of life in Iraq to match your preconceived notions that things are improving.”
110% Correct, Zelda. The fringe hold-outs REFUSE to accept the reality of the situation as a whole, and that requires them to pick and choose items that support their belief that Iraq is improving and not in any danger of disintegration, civil war, and possibly more suffering than was experienced under Saddams rule.
“I won’t view our efforts over there as a success until there is a substantial reduction in violence; and then only if there is a sane, reasonable, and effective government.”
Well said.
New schools are great, of course! But…without security, rule of law, and a functioning – effective - government…new schools are near worthless.
Zelda, I’m not sure if these hold-outs understand the scope of the security problem in Iraq. They are so desperate to ignore the MSM reports and find hope in the hopeless, that they lose sight of reality.
April 26, 2006 - 09:41 AM on April 26th, 2006
29.
The things you listed are pretty much why I was behind the American invasion in March 2003. Unfortunately our efforts have been so severally mismanaged and shortsighted that I fear that the future of Iraq will be no better than its past 30 years. 3 years later and it painfully dawns on me that President Bush and his administration don’t know what on Earth they are doing. They keep spouting out grand visions of peace and democracy without the pragmatic focus on how to realistically get there.
I think victory can still be achieved over there, but I don’t think our current leadership is capable of achieving it. Unfortunately by the time any changes are made in our strategy we will have been in Iraq for 6 years and by then it may be too late for success.
April 26, 2006 - 06:18 PM on April 26th, 2006
31-Zelda there is violence because this is a war. I keep that in mind each and everyday!
April 26, 2006 - 07:05 PM on April 26th, 2006
Okay, perhaps I could see that.
How long will this violence (in Iraq) last? 1 year?, 5, 10, 50, 100, 500?, more??? If things stayed exactly like they are now then when whould you begin to say ‘maybe this wasn’t a good thing’?
April 26, 2006 - 07:53 PM on April 26th, 2006
No I won’t say it isn’t a bad thing we did. We did a good thing. I keep in mind that this war is unlike any war we have ever fought. We are not fighting an enemy in uniform. These are people that fight 1 minute and the next they walk the streets with the other civilians. This is not 1 group we are fighting either. I can’t imagine how the commanders plan the day to day ops for the troops! I have no false hope that if we pulled the troops out that the fighting will end. The people want their freedom, they don’t want to be under a dictatorship. Too many people have fled the country while Saddam was in power..many found their way to our country and that taste of freedom is too tempting..Do I think they need to be a ME version of the US? No I don’t, but I think that is where much of the friction is coming from..The region is basically stuck in the middle ages. They don’t want the traditions/customs to fall to the wayside as they have here. That is fear, and out of fear they fight. But you can’t stop it once it takes hold.
I do think our troops will be pulled from the day to day operations, but I think that we will remain in the region permanently.
April 26, 2006 - 09:49 PM on April 26th, 2006
In case noone has heard yet, there was an announcement today that we are expecting to be able to withdraw over 30,000 troops over the next few months.
Now for a small comment on how long we may have troops in Iraq. We still have troops in Germany last I checked. While ,to my knowledge, we don’t have soldiers stationed in Japan proper, we do in Okinawa and are currently helping the Philippine government in its fight against what? That’s right folks Al Quaeda affiliated Muslim terrorists. 50+ years later we still maintain over a division of US soldiers in Korea. As late as the mid 80s, they were still accompanying Korean units on combat patrols in the DMZ. While I realize that our successes in Granada, Panama, and Desert Storm have lead everyone to have VERY high expectations of quick victories, sometimes these things just take time. We haven’t used all of the equipment at our disposal like we did in WWII which could’ve reduced the US Casualties and possibly sped the end of the conflict. However firebombing Tikrit, Mosul, or Fallujah like we did Dresden in WWII simply would not have been tolerated. Not only would the friendly moderate Muslims have risen up against us, the rest of the world might have as well.
To say this war has been mismanaged is to be ignorant of the basic underlying truth of war. War is directed chaos. You can simply NEVER prepare for or expect every possible variable. You do the best with what you have, you learn from your mistakes, and you adapt. There is a line in the movie “Heartbreak Ridge” wherein the Marines in the movie are instructed that they will improvise, adapt, and overcome. We are in the process of developing a lighter, faster, more agile while incredibly destructive military. While there is a clamor and hue for more Spec ops troops to replace the larger conventional units, it must be understood that many of the Special operations training programs are very selective to enter and equally as hard to complete. Ranger school lasts 8 weeks and when I was in, had a better than 50% washout rate. You simply didn’t ask to go, you had to be selected. Unfortunately, I passed up the opportunity. Army Special Forces (Green Beret)school is even harder to qualify for, takes over 6 months and is even harder to complete. Navy SEAL school is virtually endless or at least seems that way from what I’ve been told. It also has a better than 50% wash out rate. I do know that it can take up to a year or more depending on which specialty schools you are sent to. The individuals who even qualify to attend these schools are the best and the brightest that the military has and they still lose half or more of those who start the course before graduation. Obviously, while the idea of making more of them is commendable, the fact is that most don’t qualify to go to the schools, and most of those who do are unable to finish them. The other option would be to water down the schools to make them easier to pass and thereby reduce the quality of the graduates. Then exactly how “Special” would our Special Operations forces become?
April 27, 2006 - 01:18 AM on April 27th, 2006
They are so desperate to ignore the MSM reports and find hope in the hopeless, that they lose sight of reality.
As has been demonstrated and debated repeatedly in this forum, the MSM cannot be trusted. The MSM for the most part has an agenda, and pumps out proganda and BS.
April 27, 2006 - 06:11 AM on April 27th, 2006
FrmrArtyOffcr
1. The troops in Germany, Japan, etc. stopped fighting more than 50 years ago. There is a big difference between being there and fighting there.
2. “You can simply NEVER prepare for or expect every possible variable. You do the best with what you have, you learn from your mistakes, and you adapt.”
President Bush’s administration could of and should have done a better job. Not a perfect job but better than what they did. Also this administration is very reluctant to even admit mistakes let alone adapt to lessons learned from their mistakes.
April 27, 2006 - 06:23 AM on April 27th, 2006
39-They may have stopped fighting there, but they haven’t left have they?
We could have and should have done a better job in every war we fought, it doesn’t make the war a complete failure.
April 27, 2006 - 09:05 AM on April 27th, 2006
“President Bush’s administration could of and should have done a better job. Not a perfect job but better than what they did. Also this administration is very reluctant to even admit mistakes let alone adapt to lessons learned from their mistakes.”
How can you know, how can any of us know the full story on this? Some of us have more insight to the functioning of the military, and we all have access to information from various sources, but otherwise we all have mostly the lessons of history, logic, and common sense to analyze this.
It sounds as though you have accepted the popular MSM message. The MSM has an agenda, has been shown to be factually wrong, misrepresenting, or peddling totally false information now so many times that it simply cannot be trusted, it is unreliable. Everything reported on the MSM, especially when it is political in nature, can assumed to be much less than the full story and should be automatically suspect.
April 27, 2006 - 09:10 AM on April 27th, 2006
Robert: “As has been demonstrated and debated repeatedly in this forum, the MSM cannot be trusted. The MSM for the most part has an agenda, and pumps out proganda and BS.”
And your right-wing media DOESN’T push it’s own agenda and propaganda?!?!
Come on!
you guys are P.A.R.A.N.O.I.D