Open Letter to Bubba

Actually, it seems there is a revisionism industry around making the horrible, futile and disgusting brutality of Vietnam out as the heroic war for good and right and god, which the evil left made the US lose.

Like, if they had continued to brutalize Vietnam into submission (hmmm....THAT was working) then September 11 would never have happened.

It is sickening.

0 Replies

Actually, it seems there is a revisionism industry around making the horrible, futile and disgusting brutality of Vietnam out as the heroic war for good and right and god, which the evil left made the US lose.

Like, if they had continued to brutalize Vietnam into submission (hmmm....THAT was working) then September 11 would never have happened.

0 Replies

Regardless why The US got ionvolved in Vietnam - which it did stupidly - the fact remains that by doing so The US undertook an obligation . That obligation was unfulfilled, and millions suffered and died because The US failed to accomplish the job it set for itself. The US was not defeated in Southeast Asia, the US simply quit Southeast Asia, leaving the thugs and despots to wreak the havoc which followed US withdrawal.

I don't contend that the reasons given the public for our entering the conflict were not dishonest - they were. And that dishonor was compunded by the victory of The American Left and Mainstream Media over duty and honor. Thats probably hard for some to understand, but it is The American Left and Mainstream Media, together acting in concert, as well as Washington's politically-minded micromanagement of the war that bear the responsibility for the rape of South Vietnam and the holocaust in Cambodia. Also hard for some to understand is that that deabacle served chiefly to embolden and encourage those who would oppose The US and who would seek to impose tyranny and terror on humankind. Had The US finished the job in Vietnam, the world would be a less dangerous place today.

0 Replies

It is sickening, dlowan. We get these folks who wouldn't know the truth if it bopped them on the head. Why? Because they are such blind unthinking apologists.

timberlandko wrote:

I don't contend that the reasons given the public for our entering the conflict were not dishonest - they were.

End of story. Everything that happened after that was a series of war crimes and the only real obligation that honest law abiding folks should countenance is that all those responsible be handed over to an international court of justice.

Had The US finished the job in Vietnam, the world would be a less dangerous place today.

The world is as dangerous as it is because the USA is by far the largest producer and purveyor of weapory in the world. It's ironic but one has to wonder just how many US deaths are caused by their own weaponry sold to "friends".

Stop "helping" the people of the world. The USA lacks both good intentions and the necessary skills. The body count from the last 55 years clearly tells us that.

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

woiyo wrote:

I am still a Hawk today relative to the middle east situations GULF 1 and Afganistan and Iraq2 currently. However, these situations do not compare to Viet Nam since I realized years later that Viet Nam was not and would never be a clear a present danger tot he US. I never supported Bosnia nor Somalia as neither represented any clear and present danger to the US.

.

So then we are to just ignore the treaties that we sign just because YOU think Milosovich posed no imminent threat?

You're welcome.

With respect to your ignorant question, as always, you and it will be ignored.

0 Replies

Anon-Voter wrote:

woiyo wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I don't doubt that, Woiyo; I can't imagine that I would have time to think at such a time!

But later on; if you had killed someone, dropped a bomb, defended your guys, wouldn't you want to believe it was for a good cause? I'm not blaming anyone for their beliefs; I understand why they feel that way.

Cycloptichorn

Many years , many many years later on I did think about that. As I got older, I look back at my time and wonder if it really made a difference and today I realize what a waste the Viet Nam War was.

I am still a Hawk today relative to the middle east situations GULF 1 and Afganistan and Iraq2 currently. However, these situations do not compare to Viet Nam since I realized years later that Viet Nam was not and would never be a clear a present danger tot he US. I never supported Bosnia nor Somalia as neither represented any clear and present danger to the US.

Gulf 1 was justifiable and our tactics were outstanding and we suffered basiclly minimal death of US soldiers. Afganistan is similiar, but we need to get out NOW. Gulf 2 was justifiable going in but we never should have stayed and need to get out yesterday.

But that is just me and every Vet has different stories and feelings based upon their own experiences.

As you get older, you will realize that Iraq1, and Iraq2 were just as evil as VietNam.

Anon

I never seen a war that was not "evil". If you refer to the reasons for entering, well, maybe I will. But As of today, I doubt it.

0 Replies

Unfortunately, war is sometimes necessary and just. It is amazing that anyone would not be able to make this distinction.

0 Replies

woiyo wrote:

Roxxxanne wrote:
woiyo wrote:

I am still a Hawk today relative to the middle east situations GULF 1 and Afganistan and Iraq2 currently. However, these situations do not compare to Viet Nam since I realized years later that Viet Nam was not and would never be a clear a present danger tot he US. I never supported Bosnia nor Somalia as neither represented any clear and present danger to the US.

.

So then we are to just ignore the treaties that we sign just because YOU think Milosovich posed no imminent threat?

You're welcome.

With respect to your ignorant question, as always, you and it will be ignored.

Than why are you responding. If you want to ignore, ignore me. You can't have it both ways. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

woiyo wrote:

Anon-Voter wrote:
woiyo wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I don't doubt that, Woiyo; I can't imagine that I would have time to think at such a time!

But later on; if you had killed someone, dropped a bomb, defended your guys, wouldn't you want to believe it was for a good cause? I'm not blaming anyone for their beliefs; I understand why they feel that way.

Cycloptichorn

Many years , many many years later on I did think about that. As I got older, I look back at my time and wonder if it really made a difference and today I realize what a waste the Viet Nam War was.

I am still a Hawk today relative to the middle east situations GULF 1 and Afganistan and Iraq2 currently. However, these situations do not compare to Viet Nam since I realized years later that Viet Nam was not and would never be a clear a present danger tot he US. I never supported Bosnia nor Somalia as neither represented any clear and present danger to the US.

Gulf 1 was justifiable and our tactics were outstanding and we suffered basiclly minimal death of US soldiers. Afganistan is similiar, but we need to get out NOW. Gulf 2 was justifiable going in but we never should have stayed and need to get out yesterday.

But that is just me and every Vet has different stories and feelings based upon their own experiences.

As you get older, you will realize that Iraq1, and Iraq2 were just as evil as VietNam.

Anon

I never seen a war that was not "evil". If you refer to the reasons for entering, well, maybe I will. But As of today, I doubt it.

Woiyo, you're another I have a good respect for, even if your politics are ridiculous! :wink:

We were lied to in both Iraq wars, and in both cases, we went to war with Iraq, it was because we planned it and we wanted to.

Anon

0 Replies

Anon-Voter wrote:

woiyo wrote:
Anon-Voter wrote:
woiyo wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I don't doubt that, Woiyo; I can't imagine that I would have time to think at such a time!

But later on; if you had killed someone, dropped a bomb, defended your guys, wouldn't you want to believe it was for a good cause? I'm not blaming anyone for their beliefs; I understand why they feel that way.

Cycloptichorn

Many years , many many years later on I did think about that. As I got older, I look back at my time and wonder if it really made a difference and today I realize what a waste the Viet Nam War was.

I am still a Hawk today relative to the middle east situations GULF 1 and Afganistan and Iraq2 currently. However, these situations do not compare to Viet Nam since I realized years later that Viet Nam was not and would never be a clear a present danger tot he US. I never supported Bosnia nor Somalia as neither represented any clear and present danger to the US.

Gulf 1 was justifiable and our tactics were outstanding and we suffered basiclly minimal death of US soldiers. Afganistan is similiar, but we need to get out NOW. Gulf 2 was justifiable going in but we never should have stayed and need to get out yesterday.

But that is just me and every Vet has different stories and feelings based upon their own experiences.

As you get older, you will realize that Iraq1, and Iraq2 were just as evil as VietNam.

Anon

I never seen a war that was not "evil". If you refer to the reasons for entering, well, maybe I will. But As of today, I doubt it.

Woiyo, you're another I have a good respect for, even if your politics are ridiculous! :wink:

We were lied to in both Iraq wars, and in both cases, we went to war with Iraq, it was because we planned it and we wanted to.

Anon

Well, Iraq War was to liberate Kuwait. I fail to see why the USA had to lead a "coalition" to liberate that nation. The Arabs should have done that themselves. However, that being said, since we "had to go" to satisfy "others, our tactics were perfect. Load up, go in blasting, get the he!! out and let others sort out the mess.

We will dispute Iraq 2, but I think we can at least agree that the tactics post Saddam capture, are not and never will be what our military is designed to be. Even if we can agree we had a "valid warrent" to go in and search for WMD, that warrent expired the day we stopped looking and we should have left and let others sort it out.

0 Replies

Quote:

Well, Iraq War was to liberate Kuwait. I fail to see why the USA had to lead a "coalition" to liberate that nation. The Arabs should have done that themselves. However, that being said, since we "had to go" to satisfy "others, our tactics were perfect. Load up, go in blasting, get the he!! out and let others sort out the mess.

Noone else had any interest in 'liberating' kuwait, is why we went and did it; it may have had something to do with all that oil we get from them.

Quote:

We will dispute Iraq 2, but I think we can at least agree that the tactics post Saddam capture, are not and never will be what our military is designed to be. Even if we can agree we had a "valid warrent" to go in and search for WMD, that warrent expired the day we stopped looking and we should have left and let others sort it out.

Agreed; but the problem is, the people who will show up to sort it out after we've left are Iran and Syria and Saudi Arabia. Which isn't a positive solution to the 'problem' of Iraq. Which is why we are stuck there today.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

"Noone else had any interest in 'liberating' kuwait, is why we went and did it; it may have had something to do with all that oil we get from them. "

If I recall, Saudi Arabia seemed very concerned and "bent over backwards" to make sure the US was involved to do "their dirty work".

"Agreed; but the problem is, the people who will show up to sort it out after we've left are Iran and Syria and Saudi Arabia. Which isn't a positive solution to the 'problem' of Iraq. Which is why we are stuck there today. "

Which brings me back to the prior post. Saudi Arabia, let them be the "care-takers" of that "fringe". Remember, oil has no value if no one buys it.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn/woiyo wrote:

"Noone else had any interest in 'liberating' kuwait, is why we went and did it; it may have had something to do with all that oil we get from them. "

---
If I recall, Saudi Arabia seemed very concerned and "bent over backwards" to make sure the US was involved to do "their dirty work".

Well, they (Saudi Arabia) sure didn't attack Iraq themselves; admittedly we didn't give them much time to do so, attacking almost immediately.

Quote:

"Agreed; but the problem is, the people who will show up to sort it out after we've left are Iran and Syria and Saudi Arabia. Which isn't a positive solution to the 'problem' of Iraq. Which is why we are stuck there today. "

---
Which brings me back to the prior post. Saudi Arabia, let them be the "care-takers" of that "fringe". Remember, oil has no value if no one buys it.

Well, do we really want Saudi Arabia, where the 9/11 terrorists almost exclusively hailed from, to take over Iraq? I'm not sure that is a good idea either.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

"Well, do we really want Saudi Arabia, where the 9/11 terrorists almost exclusively hailed from, to take over Iraq? I'm not sure that is a good idea either. "

Let's face reality. If it was not for oil, we would do NOTHING in that region.

I blame this US Govt and all the crooks in DC for the past 30 years for allowing this Nation to be blackmailed by these rogue nations over a single commodity OIL!!!

This govt made lots of people rich, none of them ordinary American Citizens, and placed us in a very fragile National Security environment.

So just remember, whenever anyone talks about DEMOCRATS THIS and REPUBLICANS THAT....these are the scumbags responsible for eveything happening TODAY.

GW is only the last one in the long line of scumbags who soldout American to the Arabs and Big Business.

PS: I hear Al Gore apologized on our behalf to a group of Arabs for treating them so badly. And the other half wanted this idiot to be the NEXT IN LINE???

0 Replies

Why not apologize? We have treated them badly!

We have made lots of them rich; but none of them ordinary citizens, just their corrupt and abusive leaders. We have made their countries' economies revolve around a single commodity - oil. This leads to a weak overall economy and a lack of re-investment in manufacturing and other strong economic bases. We have attacked and killed a whole lot more of them then they ever have, or will, of us.

So why not apologize? The same leaders that have screwed things up so badly over the last thirty years or so for us, have also screwed things over badly for them.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

BUNK!!! If the Arab State Leadership shared ANY, even the smallest amount, of the "riches" we made for them and made a better life for their people, things would be very different today.

Apologize my butt!!!

PS: That just might be the looneyiest (sp?) thing you have ever said!

0 Replies

So, if we see that all of Iraq and Saudi Arabia's, et al, oil is being stolen by their leaders, and we buy it from them and don't care that it is stolen from the people, how are we not responsible for that theft? In fact, we put leaders in place specifically to steal the oil and keep us from having to pay a higher price!

If a guy steals your car, and another guy buys it from him, knowing that it was stolen, are you saying that the buyer of the car isn't guilty as well as the theif?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cyclo,

Quote:

Noone else had any interest in 'liberating' kuwait, is why we went and did it; it may have had something to do with all that oil we get from them.

Oh really???

Then lets look at the list of other countries that had no interest,and what they didnt provide...

http://www.desert-storm.com/War/nations.html

AFGHANISTAN - 300 troops

AUSTRALIA - See Australian Info Sheet

BAHRAIN - 400 personnel, 36 aircraft

BANGLADESH - 6,000 troops

BELGIUM - 1 frigate, 2 minesweepers, 2 landing
ships, 6 C-130 planes

BRITAIN - 43,000 troops, 6 destroyers, 4 frigates, 3
minesweepers, 168 tanks, 300 armored
vehicles, 70 jets

CANADA - 2 destroyers, 12 C-130 planes, 24 CF-18
bombers, 4500 troops, Field Hospital (1
Canadian Field Hospital)

CZECHOSLVAKIA - 200 chemical warfare specialists

EGYPT - 40,000 troops (5,000 special forces
paratroopers)

FRANCE - 18,000 troops, 60 combat aircraft, 120
helicopters, 40 tanks, 1 missle cruiser, 3
destroyers, 4 frigates

GERMANY - Jagdbombergeschwader 43 consisting of 18
Alpha-Jets and 212 soldiers stationed in
Erhac/Turkey during the gulf war.

5 Minesweeper, 2 Supply Vessels, 500 sailors
altogether.

HONDURAS - 150 troops

HUNGARY - 1 medical unit

ITALY - 3 frigates, 4 minesweepers, 10 Tornado
Aircraft

KUWAIT - 11,000 troops, 2 missle boats, 1 barge, A-4 Skyhawks (exact # unknown)
Leaders:
Emir of Kuwait

NEW ZEALAND - 50 medical soldiers and 2 C-130's

NIGER - 500 troops

OMAN - 25,500 troops, 63 airplanes, 4 Exocet-armed
ships

POLAND - 1 Hospital Ship

QATAR - 1 squadron of Mirage F-1E fighters

ROMANIA - 180 chemical warfare experts

SAUDI ARABIA - 118,000 troops, 550 tanks, 180
airplanes

Leaders:
King Fahad Leader of Saudi Arabia

SOUTH KOREA - 5 C-130 transport planes, 1 medical
unit

SYRIA - 17,000 troops, 300 T-62 tanks

UNITED ARAB EMRIATES - 40,000 troops, 80 planes,
200 tanks

UNITED STATES - 540,000 troops, 6 aircraft carriers,
submarines, 4,000 tanks, 1,700
helicopters, 1,800 airplanes

And here is the Australian info sheet...

http://www.desert-storm.com/War/australia.html

But your right,nobody else had any interest in liberating Kuwait.

0 Replies

Oh hell, they had a lot of interest in joining the US - the worlds sole superpower at the time - in an ass-kicking of Iraq's armies. But noone really wanted to go do it without us, is my point.

I have no problem, really, with the well-concieved and well-managed Gulf War One. It was a stellar model of World Unity in the face of an illegal invasion.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I see anon managed to get another thread locked.....

Cyclo,
I dont think it was a matter of noone wanting to do it without us.
Talking to some of the soldiers from other countries when I was there,I think it was more a matter of them waiting for us because since it was technically a UN mission,and we provide the large part of the UN's muscle,they wanted us for legitimacy.

England and France were prepared to do it themselves,but our stepping in seemed to automatically make it a US mission,sort of like Korea.

Either way,it was,as you said,well-concieved and well-managed,and I will be forever proud of what we did and what we accomplished.
Rolling up the highway into Kuwait City,and seeing the reactions of the people,made it all worthwhile to me.

I know you will disagree with me,but I feel the same way about what we did in Iraq,and for the same reasons.
Seeing the smiles on the faces of those people when we rolled thru some of the towns and villages during the invasion,in my mind,made it worthwhile.

0 Replies

Open Letter to Bubba

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know