• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Vietnam

haymarket said:
I hope you see the problem now. Go back and read your statement. Somebody saw.... somebody else never saw ......

do you get it by this point?

We have to look at evidence. I can say I saw something. You can say you saw something. We can both saw we never did see what the other guy claimed to have seen.

Its pointless.
Click to expand...

Why is eyewitness accounts pointless? What does eyewitness testimony rate in a court of law?

Quantrill
 
Quantrill said:
Why is eyewitness accounts pointless? What does eyewitness testimony rate in a court of law?

Quantrill
Click to expand...

Eyewitness accounts rate as "evidence" in a court of law. :thumbs:
 
Ockham said:
Eyewitness accounts rate as "evidence" in a court of law. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

So what? I wonder how eye witness evidence about events from five decades previously without other collaborating evidence to support it would rank in court?
 
Quantrill said:
Why is eyewitness accounts pointless? What does eyewitness testimony rate in a court of law?

Quantrill
Click to expand...

Some here would do well to read this book on the subject

Amazon.com: The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam (9780814751473): Jerry Lembcke: Books


One of the most resilient images of the Vietnam era is that of the anti-war protester — often a woman — spitting on the uniformed veteran just off the plane. The lingering potency of this icon was evident during the Gulf War, when war supporters invoked it to discredit their opposition.

In this startling book, Jerry Lembcke demonstrates that not a single incident of this sort has been convincingly documented. Rather, the anti-war Left saw in veterans a natural ally, and the relationship between anti-war forces and most veterans was defined by mutual support. Indeed one soldier wrote angrily to Vice President Spiro Agnew that the only Americans who seemed concerned about the soldier's welfare were the anti-war activists.

While the veterans were sometimes made to feel uncomfortable about their service, this sense of unease was, Lembcke argues, more often rooted in the political practices of the Right. Tracing a range of conflicts in the twentieth century, the book illustrates how regimes engaged in unpopular conflicts often vilify their domestic opponents for "stabbing the boys in the back." Concluding with an account of the powerful role played by Hollywood in cementing the myth of the betrayed veteran through such films as Coming Home, Taxi Driver, and Rambo, Jerry Lembcke's book stands as one of the most important, original, and controversial works of cultural history in recent years.
Click to expand...

It sounds like the perfect antidote to much of what has been written in this thread.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Perhaps you can then explain why the side we were fighting on lost the entire country to the enemy? Is that your definition of VICTORY?

Vietnam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



North Vietnamese ... the people the USA was fighting against. Our side lost. Their side won. Deal with it.

This book will help you

Amazon.com: Vietnam: The (Last) War the U.S. Lost (9781931859493): Joe Allen, John Pilger: Books

As to why we lost..... I could not find it on yahooanswers but this should take care of it

Why did the US lose the Vietnam War
Click to expand...

The reason the US lost was because the US didn't want to win. Which is why there was so much confusion and protest against the war.

Quantrill
 
haymarket said:
Some here would do well to read this book on the subject

Amazon.com: The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam (9780814751473): Jerry Lembcke: Books


One of the most resilient images of the Vietnam era is that of the anti-war protester — often a woman — spitting on the uniformed veteran just off the plane. The lingering potency of this icon was evident during the Gulf War, when war supporters invoked it to discredit their opposition.



It sounds like the perfect antidote to much of what has been written in this thread.
Click to expand...

It sounds you like you want to believe who you want to believe. How does this book destroy the eyewitness accounts of Vietnam vets who were spit on or treated in equally destestable manner?

Quantrill
 
Quantrill said:
It sounds you like you want to believe who you want to believe. How does this book destroy the eyewitness accounts of Vietnam vets who were spit on or treated in equally destestable manner?

Quantrill
Click to expand...

I would urge you to read the book so that your questions can be fully answered. I can point to the water for you to drink it. I cannot force you to drink nor drink it for you.
 
haymarket said:
I would urge you to read the book so that your questions can be fully answered. I can point to the water for you to drink it. I cannot force you to drink nor drink it for you.
Click to expand...

Why, cause you haven't read it. You just believe what ever its subject says? You just believe what you want.

You can only point to the water because you don't know what your talking about or what the book is talking about.

So, again, how does this book destroy all the eyewitness accounts from Viet Nam vets?

Quantrill
 
haymarket said:
People can lie to attempt to further a political or ideological agenda. That applies to ALL people be they on the right left or center. People can have bad memories about something that may or may not happened five decades ago.

Evidence must be verifiable.
Click to expand...

You're saying that first-hand testimony doesn't count. It does. And you've read it right here on this thread. Sure, all people, irrespective of political lean, can lie. But you're insinuating that those posting here are lying.

So now you can call me a liar too, haymarket, because my best friend was a 'Nam vet, and I saw him spit on and disgracefully verbally abused. He was in charge of the student-group for McGovern (tiny minority), and he had the audacity to wear his own damned fatigue jacket or whatever it's called (very bad--young yahoos didn't realize that it was his own damned jacket that he had earned).

He sat right under a much-beloved statue and just down the walk and catty-cornered to the campus recruiting/VA liason office, so there was a lot of traffic. The sight of that longhaired, redheaded rascal drove kids to a fury, especially that jacket. Yeah, he was spit on, and he took a couple of punches, and the verbal abuse was vicious, and the campus cops were always around and hated him for causing so much trouble--because, you know, obtaining signatures for a Presidential campaign is such an odious thing to do.

That's my first-hand testimony, so you can add me to the list of liars. My memory is just fine. He has been gone 17 years now and has missed his little boys growing up. My great privilege has been to tell them about this wonderful man, whose politics I entirely disagreed with, a man who had the balls to do what he did--to take abuse every single day and to be hassled and spit on and hit at least a couple of times because he had the courage of his convictions.
 
Quantrill said:
Why, cause you haven't read it. You just believe what ever its subject says? You just believe what you want.

You can only point to the water because you don't know what your talking about or what the book is talking about.

So, again, how does this book destroy all the eyewitness accounts from Viet Nam vets?

Quantrill
Click to expand...

I urge you to read it.

I can only point you to the water. You must drink it yourself.
 
haymarket said:
I urge you to read it.

I can only point you to the water. You must drink it yourself.
Click to expand...

If I was there, why do I need to read it?

You point because you were not there. And so you believe the ones you want to.

Quantrill
 
apdst said:
Our troops achieved victory in Vietnam. The defeated the enemy in every major engagement. They completed every mission they were given. They forced the North to the bargaining table. They dstroyed the Viet Cong and crippled the NVA for years.

The notion that we lost the fight in Vietnam is revisionist history promoted by the Lobbied and the media.I
Click to expand...

the USA won the Vietnam War?

wow. this takes the cake for all of your revisionist claims. do you work for IHR?
 
Top Cat said:
You of course realize that a whole bunch of those who died were left wing kids? Just like many who have died in all the wars since.
Click to expand...




When your dead my left wing friend that does not matter..............I will say that thse of us on the right did not come back and protest againsts our comrades or shipmates........You can take that to the bank.
 
Thunder said:
the USA won the Vietnam War?

wow. this takes the cake for all of your revisionist claims. do you work for IHR?
Click to expand...

You look it up my left wing military hating friend.....we won every battle in Nam but lost the war because of the suits on the left in DC...
 
Thunder said:
my father is a military veteran.

so don't you DARE accuse me of hating the military.
Click to expand...

Because your father was in the military doesn't mean you couldn't hate the military. Many people dislike the military even though their family members are veterans.
 
Ockham said:
Because your father was in the military doesn't mean you couldn't hate the military. Many people dislike the military even though their family members are veterans.
Click to expand...

I proudly protect my father's medals, and the medals of my great-uncle, who died at Iwo Jima.
 
clownboy said:
Good on ya then, and a sincere salute to them.
Click to expand...

I also protect the parchment issued to my great-aunt from President Roosevelt, commemorating her husband's death at Iwo Jima. Along with the letter of commendation from the Secretary of Defense for him and his unit.

hate the military? no ****ing way.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
if the USA won the Vietnam War, when did the VC remove their last troops from South Vietnam?
Click to expand...

ask Marvin the ARVN... it was his war after '72, not ours.

although I do use the term "victory", I see the war ending in stalemate... a designed stalemate on our part ( from the minute the first troop set foot in 'Nam, until the last one left), but a stalemate nonetheless.
I never use the term " loss", though... it's inaccurate
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom