Clinton demonstrated against his country?
A typical misinterpretation on the part of so-called patriots who did not and do not understand life, history or intelligent democratic functions.
The demonstrations were anti-war, not anti-American. Desiring to improve one's country cannot be condemned.
As for war crimes, the US itself set standards at Nuremberg. Reading them might make some people uncomfortable.
!. Demonstrating against your own country while on foreign soil is not designed and/or intended to undermine its foreign policy, or the efforts of your countrymen who are engaged in battle at the time? I suppose Jane Fonda was trying to "improve" America too? I don't think so. There's a clear difference between "desiring to improve(whatever THAT means) one's country", and committing treason. Hanoi Jane is as guilty of the latter as Tokyo Rose, IMO. Then again, I don't happen to believe that attempting to foment a communist revolt in America represents any attempt to "improve" my country; you may feel otherwise.
2. We and our allies went to some excesses at Nuremberg, and not everything we did there was either wise or just. We learned from that, and were somewhat less harsh in our judgement of the Japanese. This is not an original thought, and there are a number of historical commentaries on the subject. Nonetheless, I know what those standards are, and they only make me uncomfortable in regard to how they were applied to some of the German defendants at Nuremberg. Justice should not be confused with vengeance. If you are referring to Vietnam, I never deliberately killed non-combatant civilians, never saw anyone else do it, and never was ordered to do it. Did we accidentally kill some? Yes; that is the inevitable byproduct of a war where an enemy who does not wear a uniform fights among a civilian population. Did we kill "civilians" who were armed and/or carrying munitions? Damn right, and I make no apologies for that! (Such an enemy is NOT a lawful combatant, and forfeits any right to protections afforded by the Geneva Conventions). I suggest YOU read those, carefully, before you start talking about supposed "war crimes". Incidentally, My Lai was NOT "business as usual"; WO Hugh Thompson's report and subsequent testimony clearly reveals that to have been an anomalous event.
3. Where in Vietnam did YOU serve? What "war crimes" did you
personally observe/have first-hand knowledge of (as opposed to "heard that someone said, that he heard from a buddy, that someone saw", "I've been told", or "read in some newspaper, magazine or book". I ask, because I want to know what relevant experience you personally have, from which to discuss the matter. Please tell us, so that we may assign to your opinion the weight it deserves.
