WWII and Vietnam
Posted By: Teddy on 2007-01-31
In Reply to: I do not resent those guys... - Observer
I think that you have made a crucial error in believing that WWII and Vietnam are at all similar. WWII and the US Civil War were also very different wars. There are even major differences between Iraq and Vietnam and the Korean War although some historians would also find greater similarities in these three wars. You may rewrite the history of wars as well as US history to fit your agenda of political hatred, but you will never be able to present a convincing argument if you have completely questionable sources and facts to back it up.
You negate most historical records, which I admit often have some aspects of questionable validity, and you seem to re-create a fictionalized account to accommodate your rather far-out-there belief system based in hatred of the left. You rearrange and fictionalize facts and history to make your point. You provide spurious sources for your facts (I could probably find sources that prove that the earth is populated by aliens from Mars if I looked hard enough).
I also notice on the conservative board constant condemnation of liberals, leftists as a whole. We are characterized as stupid, immoral, crazy, unpatriotic, love the terrorists, cowards, angry, on and on. You are condemning at least 50 percent of the citizens of this country with those adjectives. Doesn't seem at all patriotic to me. Your group also points out nuts (like those who would spit on veterans) as representing the liberal mindset. I realize I am not going to be able to convince you of the great disservice you do to yourself with a narrow and naive mindset like that. I know many Republicans and with the exception of possibly one, none are as condemning and narrow-minded as the posts I see on your board. Thank heavens for that. While I have participated in bashing and see bashing on the liberal board, it rarely occurs in a generalized fashion toward all right-wingers. As I said, that would be a very naive assumption and the root of bigotry and prejudice and ultimately hatred is in the grouping of all peoples as being of one mindset.....think of Muslims, blacks in the south pre-Civil Rights, Native Americans in the 1800s (and even now). So easy to ridicule and oppress when we don't see folks as individuals. Actually the comments I see made about the liberal mindset are so far removed from the reality of most liberals in the United States it verges on the ridiculous, well no, it doesn't verge on the ridiculous, it IS ridiculous.
As far as your further condemnation of Democrats as far as blacks and their allegiances, I believe most informed political science folks would be the first to admit that the party doctrines have evolved over time. What probably counts most is the current party belief system. Just some common sense.
End of sermon.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
What about the thousands that died in WWII to
keep us free from the nazi regime/communism? What about the Korean War? They died, too, to keep communism from spreading.
Viet Nam was another story. They died and people here were so outspoken about it (just like it is happening now), and that it brought the moral of the tropps down. When our president pulled them out so quick, all he-- broke out. The Viet Cong and Cambodia armies slaughtered thousands.
Those fighting now mostly support and believe in what they are doing. If the troops are pulled out as quick as O wants, the same thing may happen there. This is why they are trying to get Iraq's military and police set up so another Viet Nam will not happen. Support our troops.
Dissent during WWII - A history lesson the right forgot....sm
Dissent during WWII - A history lesson the right forgot.
Posted by ChrisSal on Wednesday June 28, 2006 at 3:04 pm MST [ Send Story to Friend ]
One of the right’s favorite things to do is to compare the Iraq invasion to WWII and Saddam Hussein to Adolph Hitler. They claim that anyone who opposes the war is an appeaser, a terrorist sympathizer, or a traitor. This rhetoric is absolutely laughable not only because it is a huge stretch, but also because Republicans have obviously forgotten their own history.
Following the rejection of the League of Nations treaty in 1919, America developed a strong isolationist foreign policy. This was, perhaps, in response to the expansionist policies put in place by Teddy Roosevelt and the abject horror experienced in WWI. The citizenry wanted nothing more to do with sending its men to fight in foreign conflicts.
However, in 1935 Italy invaded Abyssina, which provided the first real test of America’s isolationist foreign policy. Congress passed the Neutrality Act, applying a mandatory ban on the shipment of arms from the U.S. to any combatant nation. FDR vehemently opposed the bill, but signed it under intense Congressional and public pressure. Two years later, Japan invaded China starting the Sino-Japanese war. As China was our ally and public opinion was favorable, FDR found ways to circumvent the Neutrality Act and assist China. Another two years later Germany invaded Czechoslovakia and began their conquest of Europe.
In May 1940 Germany overran the low countries, which left Britain open to invasion. By the end of 1940, Britain was financially ruined and the isolationist support was beginning to rapidly erode. 1941 brought about the Lend-Lease act and a more aggressive US posture in the Atlantic. Some claim, with some validity, that FDR provoked both Germany, with the US Naval presence in the Atlantic, and Japan, with support to China and crippling embargoes, particularly the oil embargo, into war. For the purpose of this discussion, that is neither here nor there.
As it became more apparent that the US involvement in WWII was going to deepen, a group named ‘America First’ organized to put pressure on FDR to keep America out of the war. “America First” garnered the support of people from across all shades of the political spectrum, but it was the GOP, who hated FDR and everything he did, that started the ball rolling. Twelve days after Pearl Harbor, Sen. Taft (R-OH) gave a speech to the Executive Club in Chicago. He railed against US intervention into WWII and spoke on the need for dissent, particularly during wartime.
As a matter of general principle, I believe there can be no doubt that criticism in time of war is essential to the maintenance of any kind of democratic government ... too many people desire to suppress criticism simply because they think that it will give some comfort to the enemy to know that there is such criticism. If that comfort makes the enemy feel better for a few moments, they are welcome to it as far as I am concerned, because the maintenance of the right of criticism in the long run will do the country maintaining it a great deal more good than it will do the enemy, and will prevent mistakes which might otherwise occur. - Sen. Taft (R-OH) December 19, 1942
So, the next time a rabid right winger claims that opposition to the war is unpatriotic and treasonous, remind them that as Germany rolled through Europe, Japan rolled through the Pacific, and before the fires of Pearl Harbor were extinguished it was conservative Republicans that took the lead in opposing FDR and the American entry into WWII.
The war in Vietnam was
going on long before Johnson was in office. I did not post to debate his record, merely pointing out that it is possible to respond to hurricanes in a more timely manner and in person than the current administration did. 76 people died in that hurricane and Johnson thought there was nothing else more important than his being there where the country he was president of was in trouble, a stark contrast indeed.
Ask a Vietnam Vet.
They'll tell you.
Vietnam war total
Total U.S. military deaths in vietnam was 58,000.
Perhaps your sources of information are erroneous or just not well researched. And using common sense I believe reference was made to the course and justification of the Vietnam War, not the total casualties.
friend in Vietnam
I had two friend who went to Vietnam, one returned..and yes, he too was traumatized emotionally. He returned to his parents house and I used to stay over all the time as it was a *hang out house*..had a pool, large yard, you name it..we all hung out there (smile)..anyway, John was in Vietnam in 1969..he used to sent tapes home to his parents and we would all listen..when he returned to his parents house, forget it..you could not wake him in the morning, you would make a noise or call his name and he would jump up ready to fight you..He lived like this for a few years then he married..Since then I lost contact but I can tell ya, this guy had major issues trying to reconnect with **civilization**..I ache for the soldiers who are now fighting..the dead, the maimed and the emotionally and spiritually destroyed forever..FOR WHAT??????
Who was the victor in Vietnam?
And my grandfather died in WWII, defending the country where you live now in freedom (nm)
x
Like the Nuernberg Trial after WWII or the Internat'al criminalThe Hague Court..sm
what good does it make to show the torture picture to the public? None.
I stand corrected on the Vietnam number
but people who say this is "another Vietnam" and a quagmire is also an erroneous statement.....1,700 is a far cry from 58,000, although EVERY life lost in the fight for freedom is very valuable and not to be taken lightly and I don't think anybody does.....
The Vietnam Vets call McCain "Songbird." sm
Google it. If what they say is true, he is a traitor. Hopefully, he will be the next target of the Swiftboat Vets. You are right, people will only see what they want to see no matter how much evidence you put in their faces. McCain is a RINO, not a conservative. He is also CFR (a globalist), which is even worse. I wonder who in the heck is voting for him. All the conservatives I know are freaking out about him being the possible nominee.
|
