View Single Post
  #33   Report Post  
John Smith
 
Posts: n/a
Default ( OT ) In Search Of A Plan


"DSK" wrote in message
. ..


Sure. So in a way, they agreed with the students.


I think this topic is so emotional that it makes it hard for people to read.
Where did I stated the killing of students was either justified or
warrented. I stated it was a tragedy. I stated that the troups "freaked
out". American's have the right to peaceful protest. and even if protestors
are acting in a threatening way towards the police, they do not have the
right to shot into a crowd. That said, there were many leaders of the
antiwar movement who believed the end justifies the means and whatever they
could do to bring the war home to Middle America was justified. The burning
of the ROTC building was designed to make their protest front page news
across America. Unfortunatly, once the protest went beyond being a peaceful
demonstration mob mentality took over, on both on the sides. If you have
ever seen a mob at work, it is a very scary situation.

My guess is the vast majority of the guardsmen completly agreed with the
Student Protest for America to get out of Vietnam. Most Americans and most
politicans felt that we should get out of Vietnam as quckly as possible. A
week before Kent State, Nixon stated he was withdrawing an additional
150,000 troups by the end of year.







If you believe the National Guard fired on the students because they
disagreed with the students position on the war, and decided to murder

them,
there is not much for me to say.


Somebody either gave the order to fire when there was no threat, or
simply started pulling the trigger and others followed suit. When you
shoot at people for no reason, that's murder. I do not think it was
because of the students position on the war, I think it was the whole
situation... the inflammatory rhetoric of "law & order" politicians, the
hatred of hippies and of priviledged college kids, etc etc.


My guess is everyone involved in this tragedy have nightmares about it


It's possible that many (most) of the protestors, and a few of the
Guardsmen, do indeed. But IMHO at least a couple of the Guardsmen were
glad to get away with it.

Who gave the order to fire on unarmed students, who were dispersing, and
were over 100 yards away? Who pulled the first trigger?

Your position seems to be that the killing of the students (and two of
the dead were not even protestors, remember) is fully justified and
warrantable. So, by inference, you think it's OK for Americans to shoot
other Americans over disagreements about politics. Is that right?

DSK