Communists, War Crimes and Us

by Jack

My friends and I were chatting over coffee the other day and we were talking about the  cold war and this included the Vietnam war.  Then someone asked, “Did the Commies ever charge any of theirs with a war crime?”  Back then, we knew there was plenty of war crimes committed by communist forces in South Vietnam, but we could not recall anyone being held accountable for a single atrocity, not one.  However, we has some well publicized trials on our side, do you remember Lt. Calley and Melai?

Anyway, I wound up doing a lot of searching and I could not find one instance of the communists holding one of their own accountable for a war crime.  I find that significant.  This country is not perfect, but at least we strive to be a moral nation.  When our people behave immorally we hold them accountable in a military or civilian court.  So good for us!

Our liberals rarely acknowledge what a decent country we are, especially when compared to the oppressive Islamic or Communist nations.   That’s too bad, because we ought to be expressing a lot of gratitude and kudos for this great nation that our forefathers crafted for us.

By the way, my apologies for allowing a rough draft of the above to find it’s way here.   Yeah, my bad.  I hit the publish button when I should have hit the save draft button, not the first time I did it either and I’m sure it will not be the last.  

See, I write by throwing out a lot of ideas, just whatever comes up, then later I come back and start editing out the ramblings.  It’s easier for me to see how it flows that way.  So some of you got to read my work in progress!  Sorry bout that.

 

 

This entry was posted in Border Security, Foreign policy and affairs, Liberty. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Communists, War Crimes and Us

  1. Chris says:

    This is completely incoherent, on just about every level. Content, grammar, spelling, punctuation…just awful.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Chris totally agree with you, it was ugly!!! But, its how I write when I am preparing for an article. I express a lot feelings – I get a thought and I put it down…so I ramble, but you generally don’t get to read that part! lol I edit it later and then I publish. Please see what I wrote at the end of my editorial.

      • Harold says:

        Jack, just for fun, and maybe a bit of retaliation as I also have posted unedited drafts the same as you and been chastised by what I know now as a Grammar-Nazis in a like manner but not to the point it ever made a difference to me considering the source.

        OOPS there’s that run on sentence thing again, dang!

        “It used to be we thought that people who went around correcting other people’s grammar were just plain annoying. Now there’s evidence they are actually ill, suffering from a type of obsessive-compulsive disorder/oppositional defiant disorder (OCD/ODD). Researchers are calling it Grammatical Pedantry Syndrome, or GPS.Jun 24, 2012

        I think we can agree that everyone just loves a pedantic, patronizing know-it-all. You know, the kind of person who, when you suggest he put a coat on because you wouldn’t want him to catch a cold, gives you a sad little sympathetic smile and cites several PubMed studies that detail how cold body temperatures aren’t related to getting a cold. “Don’t worry,” he murmurs as he pats you on the head, “most people don’t know that.” Oh, wait. That’s not someone we love. That’s someone we seethe at when he’s not around and are sometimes openly hostile to in their presence.
        Now how do we feel about the kind of person who doesn’t just cite arcane facts but who also insists we are using everyday speech or language to an unacceptable standard? The grimace-worthy term “grammar Nazi” gets thrown around pretty often. So does “grammar police.” But surely we can agree that one who is so adamantly fixated on correcting your language can simply be labeled a Grammar Jerk Who Needs a Hobby.
        Now that we’ve labeled every eager grammarphile as a loser, let’s backtrack and acknowledge some hard truths. There are convincing reasons to correct one’s grammar. Suppose a colleague hands you a report where “we’re” and “were” are used interchangeably, and you’re saving them embarrassment in a company meeting by pointing out the error. If you’re talking to a non-native speaker and you’re genuinely confused by their communication, it might be fair to clarify some grammar to make sure you understand the meaning correctly. But unless you’re a language teacher (isolated in a class room) or have been explicitly asked to help, lay off the grammar lessons in general conversation.
        That brings us to why it’s generally rude to correct the grammar of others. It’s simply not appropriate to correct other people’s behavior. Period. Full stop. It’s not polite to tell anyone they’re doing a bad job of, well, anything — communication included [source: Miss Manners]. One theme of being a polite person is being able to show that you are not distracted by the conventions of what’s being said but are actually interested in the meaning of what’s being said [source: Miss Manners]. It’s extremely rude to imply to others that — far from being an appreciative audience — you were simply listening for “mistakes.”
        And one other thing. Grammar Jerks Who Need Hobbies should tread very, very carefully. Grammar is a notoriously fickle and changing field and prone to confusing even the most confident grammarian. Don’t assume your knowledge of language is immutable. You might find yourself on the receiving end of a lesson from a Grammar Jerk Who Needs Hobbies even more than you do.”

        One Definition of jerk when used as a noun to describe someone.
        1a: an annoyingly stupid or foolish person was acting like a jerk
        b: an unlikable person especially : one who is cruel, rude, or small-minded a selfish jerk.
        However after reading this opinion, (below) I think it better defines Chris’s motives.

        “Paul Leonard, M.DIV Biblical Studies, Fuller Theological Seminary (2017)

        They are called Grammar-Nazis.
        Like all Nazis, they are highly intolerant. Realizing that proper grammar and syntax are easily utilized by native speakers of proper socio-economic backgrounds (genetics), they have decided the best way to silence undesirables is to concentrate solely on grammar and not the content of a statement.
        This has great propaganda value, because they can show how low-speed and stupid people’s ideas are, without actually addressing the idea that probably runs counter to the Reichminister’s list of approved sentiments.
        The Grammar-Nazi brown shirts can also now ruff up even natives who make the mistake of using a smart-phone, or other typo-inducing method of communication while spreading democratic, socialist, or other messages the Grammar-Nazi Politiburo has blacklisted.
        All in all, the Grammar-Nazi is considered the front line soldier in the clandestine fight against our free society that hopes to make sure only the correct people are given a voice when they use correct terminology that complies with all the propaganda they push.
        Your duty in the pursuit of freedom is to look at people as actual people and give charity when others are attempting to communicate. The only thing between us and Grammar-Nazis is that smidgen of compassion that overlooks a spelling mistake or other typo. If the Grammar-Nazi ever win, then even a computer induced posting error may lead to Armageddon as their death cult hopes.
        Someone skilled in grammar is a grammarian, and this term can be used in the sense of having an unpleasant obsession.
        Building on another answer, a phrase that nails it would be pedantic grammarian.”

      • J. Soden says:

        Awww – you upset Chris.
        Sometimes, the draft is better than after the editing . . . . .

      • Chris says:

        Thanks, Jack, and sorry for being rude. I understand your point better now.

        I do think we should always hold our nation to a high standard. I think the best comparison we can make is always to our founding ideals, not necessarily to other countries. I think most liberals agree that Islamic theocracies and outright Communist countries (actually Communist, not social democracies like in Europe) are far less free and praiseworthy than our own, but we also tend to judge our own country more harshly because it’s where we live, and it’s what most directly affects us. But America is deserving of praise as well, and sometimes we need conservatives to remind us of that.

  2. Libby says:

    “… but we could not recall anyone being held accountable for a single atrocity, not one.”

    Does this mean there weren’t any? You have to remember, Jack, a lot goes on in the world you NEVER hear about … our corporate media’s priorities being what they are.

    You know what? … I am very, very glad that the naked, Napalmed, little girl burns your butt to this very day. But why be resentful? Why not just be ashamed … and promise not to do it again?

    And never mind about “Joey down the street”, and what he gets up to.

    P. S.: How many times have we had this conversation?

Leave a Reply to Harold Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *