I truly and honestly hope you arent taking the position that, sans Fonda, they would have been at a complete and total loss of propaganda material. PLEASE say that isnt the case.
How in the hell can you draw that assumption from what I said? I never made any such assertion. The footage w/ Jane Fonda made for an arguably better propaganda tool, certainly, but I'm sure that they, like us, were churning it out at a regular pace.
So it didnt matter whether she was there or not, because either way the propaganda would have come out. So as far as your assertation that she 'helped' them, your opinion rates a solid score of 'meh'.
If she didnt do something foolish, she wouldnt be apologizing now, huh? Your problem is in thinking Im defending her; Im not. Im saying she expressed her opinion, as was (and is) her right to do. Im not saying that she was right, Im just saying she has just as much right to have a well thought out and intelligent opinion as she does a poorly formed and stupid one.
And I agree with that assertion. It's just when you go to and cavort with the enemy in their own country be prepared for the backlash it's going to cause. And be prepared to be called a traitor.
So in other words, a person is barred from finding things out for themselves, because if they actually GO there, they are 'cavorting with the enemy'. Too bad Fox News wasnt around back then; she could have just been content with hearing from them how great the 'rebuilding' of Vietnam was going.
So when you go and start flaming someone on an internet forum because their opinion doesnt fall in lockstep with yours, it just serves to make you sound like a fool.
I seem to recall my involvement in this diatribe starting with pointing out that your comparisons to GWB and Christian saints to be fallacious. So, who's the more foolish?
Still you. I can draw any comparison I like, and my comparison is still valid. It's sad that people's current idea of 'intelligent' debate is attacking the questioner rather than the question.
Of course it's alright for our nation's leaders to have lavish dinners with the leaders of China, Saudi Arabia, etc.- it's part of their job, and it's called diplomacy.
No, their JOB is to work in the interest of the United States, not to work in the interest of themselves.
Why can't you see the distinction between political leaders and celebrities?
Because I dont elevate one group of people over another, as you do. Tehy are all US Citizens in my book.
I said military intelligence, not counter-intelligence. Is it so far a reach that I may know a few people who are actually in the military?
And with that, I'm done with this little distraction. I'll just keep on refuting Unbreakable's inaccuracies and straw men, and he'll just keep on making personal attacks. I'm bored now.
Ha, IM the one making personal attacks. Thats pretty rich; feel free to point one out. It's always funny to see the attacker act like the victim.
And no, I dont believe you are 'in the loop' as far as the military intel over there goes. My brother was in military intelligence, and I have another friend who is right now. Just because they are working a job doesnt mean they know whats going on- there is this little thing called 'need to know'. So unless your friend is an intelligence analyst, they are only seeing a tiny and insignificant slice what is going on. Sorry bro- scuttlebutt isnt 'military inteligence', no matter how hard you try to dress it up.
And if it WERE factual and relevant, it would be classified. So either you are exagerating, or bullshitting, or you are getting passed classified info (which means your friend(s) is/are breaking the law and risking imprisonment solely to keep you informed). Hmm, Im going to go with either A or B.