Electing Devious & Inept Bumblers–Destabilizes The World–As Children Die & Humanity Suffers…
Individual excellence and personal achievement does not require the endorsement or approval of others. It rises up deep within an individual and manifests itself in their ideas and behavior; stimulating, attracting and motivating others to live exceptional lives.
Authentic leadership is a quality that cannot be purchased nor acquired at a college or university. It cannot be learned from a book nor bestowed upon an unworthy candidate. Its characteristics are not clearly delineated nor readily defined. However, most of us are keenly aware when we are in the presence of an extraordinary individual. Their tangential energy has been changing the course of human events since the inception of ‘Man’.
Our political season is approaching the home stretch. All of the candidates are being thoroughly vetted. They have been put through the emotional ringer, expending enormous amounts of energy and resources, as they traverse the Florida Keys, attempting to get their messages out to the voters.
Some of those seeking public office have the ‘heart of a champion’. Their brilliance and magnanimity are evident to those attending the political forums. Day in and day out, these candidates give their all so that we might make an informed choice on election day.
We must not let ourselves, our children and our county down again. Casting aside our pettiness and personal biases, it’s time to elect credible, competent and honorable individuals, that have demonstrated mastery over the ‘skill sets’ required of one who might lead. We have reached the tipping point when it comes to government malfeasance. There isn’t any wiggle room. We must begin attending to and recognizing those attributes and qualities, within our prospective candidates, that will actually elevate our consciousness and merge our nation towards a ‘new age of enlightenment’.
As a dominant nation in a world aflame with violence, another loss for our constitutional republic, delivered by partisan ideologues at the ballot box, will strike a deal with the unspeakable…
your recitation was edifying; however, you did not answer the question: why did YOU disobey the oath YOU took to defend and uphold the constitution by engaging in an unlawful war. If the president or congress, or your superior officer gives you an illegal order, you are duty bound not to obey. So why did you obey and break your oath?
Keysbum,
The extraordinarily honorable and courageous actions of the Marines I served with in Vietnam, are documented in the annals of history.
Placed in untenable combat settings by our corrupted civilian leadership, whom were voted into office by citizens such as yourself, they dedicated themselves to adhering to their ‘swearing in oaths’, as many of them circulated in small villages and hamlets, compassionately attending to and focusing upon the humane treatment of the civilians they came across.
Many of us, at the request of a village chief, lived within said hamlets, working with the people to improve their lot in life.
We prevented the VC and rouge elements of the NVA, from raping and kidnapping their children. We stopped the assassinations and killing of innocent farmers they considered collaborators. We prevented tax collectors from stealing everything that they had, as we guarded their food supply. At night we went on ambushes, as the villagers felt and enjoyed the security that our presence brought to them.
We shined as the epitome of goodness, under circumstances a lesser individual could not withstand.
Perhaps the veracity of oaths taken by our Commander-in-Chief and members of congress, are the ones you should question.
The Vietnam War (Conflict) was never deemed to be unlawful. The orders that were given to me, along with the orders that I issued, were legal and lawful.
I believe what you are concerned with is the following: 1) By what authority were combat troops deployed to Vietnam? 2) Was there legal justification to initiate a war there? 3) Was there gross mismanagement and neglect in the prosecution of that 16 year war?
The legality of this issue has at its basis the 10th Amendment and the War Powers Act. Thus, the article that I posted.
Sixty-five years later, this deadly dilemma still has not been adequately addressed. Imperial president power, to arbitrarily and capriciously invade the sovereign nations of another, killing its people, for whatever reason given, to me, is a war crime.
However, according to our laws (Constitution) and the oaths sworn to uphold it, these type of invasions continue to be a legal undertaking.
Thus, this policy and practice are lawful. Anyone questioning it is incorrect.
Lack of integrity and leadership in the congress, along with imperial presidents believing that they are above the law, has consistently placed our combat troops in questionable and perhaps illegal settings (If the 10th Amendment were adhered to).
Any perversion you wish to attach to our presence in Vietnam, rests squarely in the hands of the decision makers that sent and kept combat forces in Southeast Asia.
Perhaps those elected politicians were a poor choice. It’s said: “the people get the governments they deserve’.
A portion of our oath is as follows: ” Observe and obey the orders of the President of the United States of America, and the orders of the officers appointed over me.”
If we choose to live in a country that gives its president such daunting authority and power, it behooves us to closely scrutinize and assess the competency of the individuals that we select as our president and place into congress…
Remember, many young men my age were excited and politically turned on by the election of JFK to the presidency. Perhaps, you weren’t. So be it.
We were smitten by JFK’s admonition, ‘to ask ourselves what we could do for our nation’. The war is Asia was going badly, I was a fierce fighter, undoubtedly I could help Kennedy and my nation, by bringing the war to a successful conclusion.
No apologies here. I’m honored to have served my nation as I saw fit.
Remember, 15 years earlier the USA had destroyed Hitler’s genocide and Japan’s torture camps, along with their attempts at world domination.
There wasn’t anyone with a crystal ball, that could have fore tolled the incompetency and negligence that would be a part of our involvement in Southeast Asia.
Curbing the spread of communism, along with its ‘domino effect’, were our foreign policy prioritizes.
Whatever may be the failure of the USA in Vietnam, it is not my failure, nor is it the failure of the courageous and compassionate men that I served with.
We all lived in accordance with our oaths to the nation and our inner selves, along with our pledge to one another: “Semper Fidelis”.
once again, you did not answer the question. regardless of presidential orders, corruption, ineptness, patriotism, or whatever, the fact is that the war went undeclared for its duration. as such, it is prima fascia illegal under the united states constitution. it doesn’t matter what resolution or law was passed to try and legitimize the war, it was not declared by congress, therefore all laws, proclamations, resolutions, bake sales, or anything else used to justify it, were contrary to the constitution and therefore null and void. all hostilities ordered, and undertaken, were illegal on their face. there is no other argument to make. as such, you had a duty to disobey your president, your commanding officer, or anyone who gave you orders to participate in the conflict. doesn’t matter how much you admired them, doesn’t matter that you wanted to “help.” our constitution gives congress, and ONLY congress the authority to declare war. your assertion that Vietnam was legal is absurd and a cop out from explaining your refusal to obey your oath. you participated in an illegal war, and followed illegal orders, and by your own admission are proud of it.
just think if people lived up to their morals and ethics. perhaps when they blew the trumpets for war, no one would show up. now wouldn’t that be something?
Keysbum,
You’re not a child. I’ve answered all of your questions many times over. You just don’t like my answers.
During this lifetime there will be ideas and understandings that you’re in disagreement with. It doesn’t negate, invalidate nor discredit an individual, because their experiences have birthed a contrary perspective and realization, to the ones held by yourself.
It doesn’t give you the moral high ground because you clasp onto a distinct impression of an event, which you may know little or nothing about.
Through our exchanges, I’ve come to appreciate your divergent and well-thought out views on a variety of issues.
For the most part, I value your intelligent discourse. Attending to your cogent presentation, I’ve secured additional insights and increased my understanding of matters worthy of serious consideration.
A secure, confident and learned individual is not threatened by another’s experience or point of view.
I truly value your posts. I carefully read them, attempting to add clarity, while elaborating with additional information when called upon.
I am not looking to gain acceptance nor approval.
I believe that it’s important to respect and welcome divergent perspectives, without forming a harsh condemnation of a poster.
For its only in an environment fostered by dignity and appreciation for the views held by another, that respectful disagreement can take place. Deference is required to effectively exchange ideas.
Sometimes, agreeing to disagree, will cultivate the prerequisite acknowledgements required before a middle ground may be reached.
“For its only in an environment fostered by dignity and appreciation for the views held by another, that respectful disagreement can take place. Deference is required to effectively exchange ideas”.
“Sometimes, agreeing to disagree, will cultivate the prerequisite acknowledgements required before a middle ground may be reached”.
couldn’t agree more, couldn’t have said it better myself. but with all due respect, you have not answered the question. I am not looking for validation of my opinion, nor am I seeking to judge you for yours.
what I am trying to get at, is this: how can an otherwise decent, moral, individual, on the word of someone who he doesn’t know, hasn’t met, and knows nothing about, beyond the superficial, pick up a gun and go shoot someone, again, who he doesn’t know, has done nothing to him, and poses no threat? how is that possible? for people like captainlarry, the answer is obvious: they like it. what right do you have as an individual to take someone else’s? because we have embargoed cuba for so long, imposing considerable suffering, would you be ok with it if they came over to key west, shot up the city and the people because they thought we were a threat?
you can’t go along with things just because an authority figure says to. you are an individual with an independent mind, with control over your own actions. killing people you do not know, and are of no threat to you, is simply not tenable.
Mr. Donnelly:
read this.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-elite-the-great-game-and-world-war-iii/25160
remember, henry Kissinger, one whose policies you supported by going to Vietnam had this to say about you, and all your military comrades:
“military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy.”
why on earth would you support that??
Keysbum,
Tragedy has struck for a friend. I’m mobilized, tending to what is before me.
I will assimilate recent info provided and get back to you……