People who read The Nation don’t care about POWs or people in uniform. So what was their point for printing this, other than as a hit piece on McCain during the election?
Where was The Nation on this very issue when Kerry (McCain’s partner in crime) was running for president?
MIA, that’s where.
I don’t like McCain, but anything printed in The Nation is a commie lie, and anybody on FR who believes anything from “The Nation” is an idiot.
You ever watch Democracy Now!, Rabs? They make Olbermann look sane by comparison.
The other POWs didn't get warm clothing and hot coffee. They shivered in shorty pajamas and ate wormy rice.
“a memoir of his experiences covering the war in Cambodia for the New York Times”
I should have known the New York Times was involved. There is no limit how low these people will go.
Get this commie cr@p out of here, you commie.
This is the same crap that the Obama campaign was putting out in 2008.
Can’t JD do better than copying Obama????
Hit piece. And The Nation? Now THERE’S a credible source (snort).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Schanberg
Following years of U.S. carpet bombing campaigns over Cambodia and Laos, Schanberg wrote in The New York Times about the departure of the Americans and the coming regime change, writing about the Cambodians that "it is difficult to imagine how their lives could be anything but better with the Americans gone." The Khmer Rouge took over Cambodia in 1975 and killed approximately two million people. A dispatch he wrote on April 13, 1975, written from Phnom Penh, ran with the headline "Indochina without Americans: for most, a better life."[1] However, in the same piece, Schanberg also wrote, "This is not to say that the Communist-backed governments which will replace the American clients can be expected to be benevolent. Already, in Cambodia, there is evidence in the areas led by the Communist-led Cambodian insurgents that life is hard and inflexible, everything that Cambodians are not." However, in the same article, Schanberg then went on to reject claims that the communist takeover of Cambodia could lead to state-sponsored genocide: "Wars nourish brutality and sadism, and sometimes certain people are executed by the victors but it would be tendentious to forecast such abnormal behavior as a national policy under a Communist government once the war is over."
Are we seriously citing The Nation and Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now?? Come on. You will not find a person on this planet more committed to the destruction of American values and the American military than Amy Goodman. She routinely refers to “war crimes”, the wholesale slaughter of women and children by American soldiers, and has never met an enemy of this country she couldn’t support.
When Amy Goodman takes a position, its a good idea to go the other way.
I don’t like McCain, but I will not besmirtch his service to this country in Vietnam. He is a legitimate war hero, and has my respect for that.
I held my nose and pulled the lever for him in 2008, and will not ever do so again. I sincerely hope that JD Hayworth wins in Arizona ... but a denigration of John McCain’s military service is a denigration of the service of every soldier that spent time in Vietnam or since.
SnakeDoc
“The Nation” leftists like YOU, Schanberg, did everything in your power to LOSE the war in Vietnam, cost 2 million Cambodian lives and PI$$ED all over returning soldiers. And now we’re supposed to believe you are OH SO CONCERNED about MIA’s and POW’S!!! BULLSHITE!!!
Hey this is from a guy who won Pulitzer’s by writing about how much better off Cambodia would be with the Americans out of the region.
I am no fan of McCain. I have never liked what happened to our POW/MIA left behind. But I doubt any leftie who relies on “...I was told personally...” as a proof of factuality
Well, I always assumed what was in this article was true, but now that I see The Nation is promoting it, that makes me doubt the story is true after all. The Nation promoting someone is like Joe Isuzu saying “Trust Me”
You must not know how radically leftist The Nation is.
It isn’t just a very liberal publication that can be taken with a grain of salt, it is radically, insanely, leftist and is useless for information.
For much of my adult life I have tried to read much of the left including In These Times, The Nation, The Progressive and such, and I can tell you that the Nation is just a radical rag with no value.
I recall a story, during the ‘08 campaign, and I think from The Nation, that McCain was a not really kept in a cell, but in a hotel and given prostitutes, in exchange for cooperating with the north. The story was an outrage - and almost made me like McCain. Does anyone else recall this? Had the election been close, this and the story that it is McCain who is not a “natural born citizen” would have been the topic of “serious” MSM discussion.
THE NATION
33 Irving Place
New York, NY
10003
Phone :212-209-5400
URL: Website
The oldest and most leftwing of all popular American weekly magazines
Supported the Russian Revolution and was first U.S. magazine to publish the Soviet Constitution
Opposed America’s Cold War policies after World War II and generally supported the Communist bloc
Founded in 1865 by politically radical abolitionists, The Nation is the oldest weekly magazine in the United States and the farthest Left of all popular American magazines.
The magazine’s first major backer, who helped it launch in 1865 with $100,000, was the Boston lead pipe manufacturer who had supplied John Brown with munitions for his raid on Harper’s Ferry in 1859. Its first literary editor was the son of abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison.
By 1881 The Nation had shrunk to little more than a book review insert in Henry Villard’s New York Evening Post newspaper, as it wallowed through a succession of editors. In 1918 Henry’s son Oscar Garrison Villard (who helped found the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) took over The Nation and shifted it politically far to the Left, where it remains today. The Russian Revolution was underway, and the magazine was the first in America to publish the Soviet Constitution.
Villard retired in 1932. He was succeeded by Freda Kirchwey, a Stalinist who moved the magazine to the far left on issues of birth control and sexual freedom, and supported the Communists in the Spanish Civil War. She became a target of radical wrath, however, when she refused to endorse the pro-Soviet Progressive Party campaign of Henry Wallace in 1948, which was launched to oppose the Cold War.
Carey McWilliams replaced Kirchwey as The Nation’s Editor in 1955. The magazine took the Soviet side in challenging America’s Cold War policies, attacking the U.S. defense program and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). It also provided a platform for pro-Soviet Marxists like Gabriel Kolko and Howard Zinn, and for a young consumer advocate named Ralph Nader. (In 2004, however, the Editors of The Nation would ridicule Nader and his presidential campaign, favoring instead Democratic candidate John Kerry.)
Marc Cooper, the former host of the syndicated radio program RadioNation, is a Contributing Editor for The Nation.