BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?

Subject: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: Steve in Idaho
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 03:38 PM

The other thread, on "Were Viet Nam Vets Spit On" is redundant, argumentative, and fairly counter productive in one sense. On the other it is very replicative of the current attitudes of this country on the war and those who participated in it. And I am not speaking for anyone - we all did what we believed to be correct and I am glad that we are all alive today to recognize that.

GUEST questioned whether the folks here were really in Viet Nam or not. It is always somewhat speculative on an internet forum to be positive about things like that. And I suspect it resides in the backs of our brains that "Hmmmm Is he/she really .......?"

I admire the metaphorical references and the apt eloquence of those who posted as I think the debate is essential to the healing of the country around this devisive issue. Spaw - your eloquence is most appreciated. Mick, Troll, ArtBrooks, and those that I don't remember all have opinions related to the "Well we were there" group. And can see both sides of the story. And Bobert, GUEST, GUEST, and others I don't remember on the "We weren't but we were not part of the atrocity" rendered on Veterans group. All have been most eloquent in thier position and position during the debate.

For me - I was there and my lengthy diatribe is simply to point you to my unit's website. We just started finding each other in April and it has been a mixed bag of glad and sad. But for those who may be curious - go to 5th Communication Bn. and check out what I did for a living there. My own pictures are mostly gone. Check out Al Browns. Check out 5th Comm on Patrol. There are no ghastly pictures of dead and dying - just a bunch of young Marines trying to do their job.

Have a superb day to you all -

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: Tinker
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 03:56 PM

Thanks, Steve....unlike many internet sites we've been able to see and hear each other on many levels... thanks


Kathy

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: BuckMulligan
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 03:58 PM

Isn't just about anyone over 30 a "veteran" of the Viet Nam War, one way or another?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 06:18 PM

Norton,

Kilo 1 Actual, 3 Bn, 3 Reg, 3 Div. 68-69 (Cam Lo, Con Tien, Gio Lin, Dong Ha). The Kilo 2 Actual became the most famous or infamous Marine in 1987. But thats another story. And Life magazine bought up most of my pictures for $9,000. And thats another story.

But even more strange, I recently signed on to this Classmates.com thing, which has an adjunct for the military (units served, locations, times etc) and a further site for military brats (my father was a Navy officer). Oh, the ghosts that came flying out.

At my old high school in Hawaii, there are several people who are running web sites for those of us who marched on, or departed the islands never to return. These folks only use the Classmates thing as a resource field, and run their own information networks, etc. independantly of it. The point; within days of signing on to their sites (not Classmates) and the Military Brats site, several old names came up, including one who died right after contacting me.

And she was a bit famous. Her name was Lynda Van Devanter, and she was an Army nurse in Viet Nam at the same time I was a Marine Lt, later writing a book called "Home Before Morning" which became the basis of the TV series "China Beach". Lynda and I had several mutual friends, and she dated a buddy of mine whose Dad later became Speaker of the House (Jim Wright, another good story). We both got back from the Nam at about the same time, though she became very anti-war, and I was not. We met several times after our return, but the politics were too present, and we drifted apart. Her message on the web site was one of those "Hallo out there" things, that were meant to be responded to when a connection was made, but she was dead of some blood disease, when I tried to make contact.

Now I've not responded to the GUEST-spit threads 'cause it made no sense to me. Yes, I was actually spit on by a couple of hippies in my uniform coming up from the Oakland docks to catch a bus to my aunt's in Berkely, who was getting me to a plane later in the day. And yes, I was arrested several minutes later for using a piece of rebar to whip the faces and backs of the the aformentioned two. And yes, the cop, who had just gotten out of the Marines, let me out of the cruiser at my aunt's. And yes, I later became a cop for 18 years. Why bring up old pleasures?

But I do see the point of leaving the best of the worst memories, as the last memories. And I do appeciate the gentle nature of the thought that, absent the occasional horrors of war, not every day was spent in killing enemy troops, and some of the best times of our lives were spent in the same country. I know that I found that out long before Lynda, but I do hope she found it at the end.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 06:45 PM

Well, not exactly.

My unit of the Illinois National Guard was activated on 13 May 1968; my brother Tony and I (as well as a number of our cousins, three sets of twins, and fourteen other sets of brothers) were called together. After outfitting at Ft. Carson, CO, the unit was sent to Chu Lai, where it acted in support of the Americal Division. One of the tasks was running tankers of JP4 up and down Highway 1 -- and yes, they were ambushed, and yes, some guys died.

Some of those called up were seperated, myself among them. Almost all of these were Eleven Bravo, including myself. Some of these chaps saw service in VN, some were wounded, all acquited themselves well. Me? I went to Korea and served with the Seventh Infantry Division -- as my brother to quaintly put it, "I'm supply clerk, you're infantry. We're going to Vietnam. You got to Vietnam you'll get your ass shot off. They can't send blood relatives to a combat zone; don't be a shithead and sign any waivers."

So the Army lost me when the unit was deactivated, but that's a whole 'nother story.

About the "blood relatives" thing: on 14 May 1968, Tony and I got permission to see my youngest brother, Ted, off to the Air Force. Within 36 hours, my mother had all three sons in the military. Ted trained as a Vietnamese linguist, and after Tony returned he flew airborne voice intercept over North Vietnam. Ted flew air intelligence cover for the Son Tay raid, at that time the longest combat mission ever flown by the USAF. (Yes, Ted once a a sweat shirt that said, "I am a cunning linguist.")

The difference between Vietnam and Korea at the time was one of scale: the killing in Vietnam was wholesale, in Korea retail.

Former Sgt.,
Former 11B40

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 07:29 PM

Korea, 7/17th Artillery, 2nd Infantry Division, 1/69-2/70
Vietnam, 3/16th Artillery, Americal Division, 2/71-2/72.

Been there, done that, don't worry about it much.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 07:32 PM

Thanks fir the kind words, Steve. I know it is difficult to get beyond the old tapes, and for some, not possible. Hey, we all ended up going thru some real funky times but we went thru them, I think, with character and courage on both sides of the planet. And I'd like to think we are still brothers of courage and character.

I know that I may ruffle some feathers and I know there are folks who wouldn't think twice about rapping a re-rod up side my head, but wouldn't change a da'gone thing. Bottom line, our generation got screwed. Our memories shouldn't be battles fought in southeast Asia or battles fought in the streets in cities across America. They should have been of rock concerts, softball games, picnics and the local drag strips.

But it is *our* history and it can't be changed without *our* permission. To all my brothers and sisters who fought in Vietnam or in the streets: I may not agree with you on every issue but I love you.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: Steve in Idaho
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 08:21 PM

I don't think that was my intent Bobert. I just want a bit of a space to quietly explicate that no matter what - we did some things and today we are living our lives. I love artbrooks closely cropped answer! I think most of us are that way most of the time. But it certainly was an opportunity for me to show off a bit with my old unit. We were good Marines and we did a good job.

One of the posters on the other thread made a comment about being all puffed up about it and wanting to do it again. I don't know about that - but if I had my life to live over again - I would change nothing. I believe I am a good person and this goodness came from adversity overcome.

Just my .02 of ramblings -

And I love you too Bobert - now - would you like a real sensual backrub? *Wink n' grin"

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 08:41 PM

I suppose after all wars there are veterans on both sides who think that their side was in the right.

And there are other veterans on both sides who'd disagree.

I think the main lesson of history is that it never repeats itself, and that trying to read the present by the light of the past can be vey dangerous.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST,Joe Offer, apparently cookieless
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 08:56 PM

I wanted to file as a conscientious objector. I could see no reason whatsoever for the U.S. being in Vietnam, and I still can't. I'm glad we lost that war. I think our participation in it was immoral. That's my belief.
However, at the time, you could not get conscientious objector status unless you considered all war immoral, in all circumstances. In general, I thought it was moral for the Allies to fight in World War II, so I could qualify for conscientious objector status unless I lied. Instead of that, I enlisted for four years, with a guarantee of German training and assignment in Germany as an intelligence analyst and German linguist. I could serve my country in good conscience in Berlin, and I'm glad I made that choice.
I did what I had to do the avoid going to Vietnam, and I'm glad I did it. I don't call myself a Vietnam veteran, although I am quite proud to call myself a veteran. Berlin was a terrorist target at the time, so it wasn't like I was on vacation. I have a lot of respect for people who followed their conscience and went to Vietnam. I opposed the war there and was conscience-bound to avoid going there. I hope the Vietnam veterans have as much respect for me, as I have for them.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 09:18 PM

My brother was in Bavaria doing the same thing, as you know, Joe, although a couple of years earlier than you, I think.

My Rog signed up in the Air Force right out of high school in 1966 and wound up in the Phillipines working in AFARTS. He doesn't talk about any of it too much. Like artbrooks, he just did what he felt was necessary and right for him. From what he has said, I believe he went on a few advance communications setups in country.

One kind of funny thing is he has an award and medal from Marcos for service during an horrible huricane which hit the Phillipines in which our servicemen and women played a big part mopping up and rebuilding roads, as well as saving lives.

The only other thing he's ever mentioned is having to have a fairly high security clearance in order to help off-load bodies, sworn to secrecy as to the actual numbers.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: toadfrog
Date: 21 Nov 02 - 11:15 PM

My service was similar to Joe Offer's, although I think a bit earlier. I was mustered out in April, 1965. I was not in Vietnam. Several of my anti-war friends were. One day a group of us went down to the Federal Building and turned in our decorations as a protest. My decorations were nothing. But my best friend turned back a combat infantryman's badge and Purple Heart, and one former Medic turned back a Distinguished Service Cross.

Hey, Claymore. Do you know what a DSC is?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: Chip2447
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 03:21 AM

Too young to be a Vietnam Vet, barely, but a Vet nonetheless. To some I offer thanks for serving. To others thanks for exercising our rights to protest as long as you treated those who went with respect.

Chip(2447)

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: RangerSteve
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 06:09 AM

I'm also a veteran, like Joe Offer and Toadfrog, but I prefer to call myself a VIetnam Era vet; my way of avoiding the war was to join the Navy, knowing my chances of being in VN would be slim. I never left the Western Hemisphere. I had friends and acquaintances who were in the war, and their stories are pretty harrowing. They have a lot to be proud of. And damn the Nixon and Johnson administrations for prolonging that useless war.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 07:33 AM

No Nam-time veteran I know hates or even dislikes those who protested the war or registered as COs based upon their convictions. Many of them DO dislike those (and yes, they were there, I knew some) who protested because it would interrupt their lives/schooling/whatever. As a result, all of the Nam-time veterans I know feel that they a) were royally screwed by the government, and b) are usually behind their peers in careers, education, etc.

The chickens are coming home to roost now: for instance, if you were exposed to Agent Orange (as my brother Tony was) you rather automically qualify for a VA disability if you develop diabetes (as Tony has).

Musically, both sides gave us some pretty great songs. "Draft Dodger Rag", "Talking Vietnam Blues", "Sergeant, I'm a draftee", "Universal Soldier", "Cops of the World" and others from one and...heck, search the lyrics yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: Allan C.
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 09:02 AM

During the war I defended our nation's honor in Montana, flying a typewriter. I spent my entire tour there. Part of the time, I worked in the assignments section and typed up countless numbers of orders that sent folks to the 'Nam. I felt immeasurably guitly about having such a comparatively cushy thing going while so many others were heading for the war. On the other hand, I was glad to be safely distant.

Was I against the war? Not exactly. Frankly, I had an extremely naiive notion of what the war was about and recognized that I didn't know enough about it to have a realistic opinion.

What I did know was that I didn't want to shoot anyone and most importantly, I didn't want to get shot at! I joined the Air Force in order to keep from being drafted into the Army. I had tried very hard to get into VISTA or the Peace Corps; but those wheels were moving much more slowly than those of the draft. I concluded that by joining the Air Force I would have few opportunities for combat even if I were sent to Vietnam. That certainly turned out to be the case for me.

My dress uniform sported a "Vietnam Era" ribbon along side of a couple of others. I was a bit embarrassed to wear it; knowing that there were so many others who had done much more to earn it than simply being in the armed forces during that period.

As has been mentioned by others, the guys who went to Vietnam were there to do a job. They may not necessarily have been totally in favor of the war. Certainly, many were. But it is my belief that for the largest part, the main, driving force for virtually everyone there was simply to stay alive until their tour was over. There were no politics in that.

As I look back now, I continue to have mixed emotions about the war even though I am far better informed than I was in those days. The only thing I know for certain is that I have the deepest respect for anyone who even so much as got off the plane in Vietnam. Anyone who knows me well will tell you that I make it a point to gratefully shake the hand of anyone whom I discover spent time there. I am sorry they were in the war; but I am grateful to them for whatever they endured and that they made it home alive.

Thanks!

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: artbrooks
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 09:18 AM

For me, the most important thing about the Vietnam War is that it isn't all that important to me. 30 plus years is more than half my lifetime and almost all of my adult life. Since then, I've gotten married, we raised two wonderful daughters, I've received a couple of college degrees, had a full career, lived in many different parts of our country, retired, gone back to college, and feel I have a lot more of life to look forward to.

That's the key...look forward. I feel as sad for those of my contemporaries who cannot think beyond Vietnam or for whom that was the defining period of their lives as I do for my father's peers whose lives' peak came during WW2 or Korea and have been coasting ever since. Yes, things happened then that were bad and many people did things that were wrong and they regret. Get over it. There are people out there who still foam at the mouth at the thought of Jane Fonda's PR trip to Hanoi...so what? She was a B-movie bimbo trying to reviving a failing movie career. Now she's an OLD former B-movie bimbo. Get over it. The youngest Vietnam vets are almost fifty, and many are in their sixties or even seventies. So what...look forward to new opportunities. If you can't, I'm sorry for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 10:00 AM

Right on, Art!

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 10:46 AM

toadfrog, Yes I know what a DSC is though you obviously don't know that it is an Army decoration, and not given to Marines. It might be interesting to see how many DSC were turned in vs Navy Crosses.

And yes, I do know that returning the decorations meant absolutely nothing, as the decorations honors and privledges don't go with the actual medal. There was a case of a local veteran who had, like your friends, decided to throw his medals at the Pentagon. Many years later he was discovered working at the local VA hospital, having used the privledges and hiring points of these medals to gain senority in the Federal job selection process. The local vets, who remembered his self rightious attitude at the time, were furious at this when it hit the papers, and are demanding that he be fired, which I think is only correct. However the Federal union is fighting to keep him, and I suspect that he will be kept on. Understand that the issue is not returning the medals, it was using their benefits, after the camera lights were turned down, and the cheers died away.

And artbrooks, you are dead on... I cannot imagine having any more fun, than I'm having right now. Jams three times a week, concerts almost every week end, a great lady in my life, a daughter and grandson who love me better than I love myself, a small town which takes me an hour to walk through on Sunday, what for the meeting and greeting, and the quiet knowledge that the anger and frustration that I sometimes see on this site, means the good guys finally won...

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST,Murph10566
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 11:29 AM

Interesting thread, Steve - and appropriate, so near Veterans Day...

I served with the 4th Inf Div in the Central Highlands in '68 & '69; just last week I stood with several thousand Vets, and others, at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington.   There was quite a cross-section of America in attendance.

It was an important visit for me, to reaffirm my feelings about what happened to me and so many others all those centuries ago.   Without question, my Service in Vietnam changed my Life; it altered my perceptions forever, and taught me to finally appreciate the simplest (and greatest) gifts of Love, Family and Friends...

Many men from my old unit have been in touch over the years, several of them still struggling with the Past, seemingly unable to 'look forward' as Art suggests.   I feel badly for my old Comrades and their inability to 'put it behind them'; their battle goes on, I guess - PTSD.   I also feel badly for those I'll refer to as 'Professional Vets', who never miss an opportunity to drag out some dusty remembrance of real or imagined 'Glory'...

A tough legacy, Vietnam - Do I think about it often ?   Not really.
Would I do it all again ?   Probably.    Will I ever forget ?   No.

Welcome Home,

Murph

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 11:47 AM

Unfortunately, the Real Vietnam Vet (tm) argument is still being used in the US as a litmus test for patriotism, to wit:

Here are some excerpts from a Washington Post article on whether Massachusetts Senator John Kerry (a VV & VVAW) will be a viable candidate for the 2004 presidential campaign:

Kerry Rises in 2004 Speculation Sweepstakes

by Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 20, 2002; 8:44 AM

The whispering in Washington these days is that John Kerry could emerge -- emerge being one of those great hocus-pocus journalistic words -- as the Democratic front-runner in the race for president should Al Gore decide to remain an author.

Kerry has some obvious assets. A Vietnam war hero. A veteran lawmaker with foreign policy experience. A wealthy wife to help finance the campaign. And good hair.

He also has some drawbacks, not least of which is his image as a Massachusetts liberal of the kind that was demolished by Dubya's dad. And he's never had a particularly warm relationship with the press.

(...)

Kerry, newly reelected, will have to find a way to connect. His Nam experience inoculates him, McCain-like, on questions of war and peace, although he did vote against the Gulf War resolution in '91.

In a Los Angeles Times poll of Democratic National Committee members, Kerry finished second, with 10 percent, behind Gore's 13 percent. (All right, so "No Preference" crushed them both at 46 percent.)

(...)

The Boston Globe examines "a basic question for would-be challengers to President Bush in 2004: After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, can a Democrat vote against the president on war and still remain a viable national candidate?

"Responds Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, a Vietnam veteran and likely Democratic presidential candidate: 'Absolutely. Without any question.'

"So, did Kerry vote 'safe' when he supported Bush on the Iraq resolution? To that, Kerry says heatedly, 'You don't vote safe or nonsafe when you're talking about sending people to war. . . . You had a national security issue. You may hate the timing, the cynicism of it, the raw political exploitation of it. But you still have a fundamental national security issue.' . . .

"Says Kerry: 'If Dick Cheney . . . and a bunch of people who didn't serve want to make that the fight, I'm ready for that. I'd welcome that. How do you really best defend the security interests of the United States – that's a debate we should have.'"

The old chicken-hawk charge.

"On the national stage, Kerry is definitely trying to walk a fine line between critic and patriot. He has been highly critical of Bush policy in the Middle East. He was the only Democrat to speak out on Bush administration tactics in Afghanistan, while defending the Democrats' 'right to ask questions on war.' He continued his high-profile questioning of the Bush administration's talk of war with Iraq, winning praise from national pundits like The Wall Street Journal's Albert Hunt, who wrote recently that 'no Democrat has offered a more coherent criticism of the Bush national security policies, ranging from military operations in Afghanistan to diplomatic fumbles in the Mideast.'

"Yet despite all the cautionary talk, and despite heavy lobbying from antiwar constituents, Kerry voted for the Iraqi war resolution. On election day, at least 20,000 Massachusetts residents voted for a write-in Senate candidate, Randall Forsberg, to protest Kerry's support of war.

"Cynically speaking, that is good news for Kerry. He can use it to show he is not the stereotypical Massachusetts liberal the Bush clan loves to run against."

(...)

All this reminds us of a New Republic cover story last June titled "Can John Kerry make people like him?"

"Kerry can't seem to catch a break. His press clippings record 18 years of journalistic wisecracks about his ego, his looks, and his self-promotion. The word 'aloof' comes up constantly--51 times in the same sentence as Kerry's name, according to a Nexis search. 'He is widely derided as aloof and arrogant,' The Boston Globe has said. 'Kerry . . . has been called brooding and aloof,' informed USA Today in 1996. 'Some critics call him aloof. One political observer characterizes him as "a frozen piece of fish,"' CNN snickered that same year. . . .

"So Kerry is attacking the frozen-fish factor head-on, launching an aggressive effort to reintroduce himself to the public as a centrist, a veteran, and, most importantly, an all-around likable guy. Don't call it a repackaging, his advisers say--they're just revealing the inner John."

* * * * * * * * *

It is insanely dangerous to allow the media hacks who made their careers in Vietnam (ie, Jennings, Rather, Brokaw, et al) to dominate the debates on war and peace, by using this "Vietnam litmus test".

I rarely agree with Christopher Hitchens, but his recent article pointing out that using the Vietnam litmus test and chicken hawk arguments merely deflects the serious issues we as a nation should be debating when it comes to war and peace, as well as national security. That debate is NOT one where the citizen is excluded on the basis of not having served in the military. For starters, that debate excludes nearly half the nation's population--women. That exclusionary tendency is already taking root. In the same article on Kerry, the newly elected House Minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, was attacked for having voted "wrong" by voting against the Gulf War in 1991. However, the same accusation, in the same article, is NOT levelled against John Kerry, who also voted against the Gulf War in 1991.

Kerry's vote can be right because he has combat experience, but Pelosi's vote must be wrong because...?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST,The O'Meara
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 12:15 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST,The O'Meara
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 12:59 PM

(Sorry about that last post. Comes from being technologically challenged)

There is one big thing that we Nam vets have in common with almost everyone else who was an adult American at that time: guilt. Guilt for what we did, and guilt for what we didn't do. A few years ago I was having a few toddies with a friend when we both apologized to each other - him for not going to Vietnam and me for going. (Yes, guilt is a bad thing and it is supposed to go away in time, but for me it creeps back in at 2 in the morning.)

The article on Kerry reminds me of a "joke" I heard in a group counseling session: Q. How many Vietnam Vets does it take to change a lightbulb? A. I don't know, how many? Q. THAT'S BECAUSE YOU WERENT THERE, M.....F...., NONE OF YOU WILL EVER KNOW...

I was assigned to the 44th Med Brigade, 55th Group, and TDY (temporary duty) to the 4th infantry for awhile, then to the 283rd MDHA (Medical Detachment, Helicopter Ambulance) called "Medevac" or "Dustoff", then to the 71st Evac Hospital. I have severe PTSD, and I can only talk about this stuff for a short time, then I have to get away from it for awhile. This isn't to brag or complain, it's just to let you know where I'm "coming from."

I have met a lot of people who are Professing VVets and Professional VVets. Professing VVets are the ones who were "there, but my duty was so secret even I don't know what I did", Professional VVets tell you they're a Vietnam Veteran before they tell you their name. There are some deep psychological reasons why they do this, so I can't automatically condemn them, but they do tend to screw things up for the rest of us when we do try to talk about it.

I don't even know why I'm writing this now, so I'll go away and come back later.

O'Meara

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 01:21 PM

Thanks for the post, O'Meara.

It is just that "they do tend to screw things up for the rest of us when we do try to talk about it" problem that disturbs me when we are trying to discuss the current war on terrorism, and the possible upcoming war on Iraq, and the discussion becomes swamped with pro-Bush administration vets shouting down anyone who disagrees with the Bush administration's war on terror, and possible war on Iraq. Or any number of very important, serious issues dealing with national security, world security, disarmament, war and peace, etc. that we need to discuss without rehashing the "did too/did not" red herring arguments rooted in the Vietnam war.

It is fine with me for veterans to discuss their service. It is fine with me if people want to keep debating whether veterans were right to serve, or anti-war activists were wrong to condemn them for it.

But IMO, it is wrong for vets to introduce the fact of their service, as a means of scoring points in a debate about whether or not we should go to war today. Or to use their military service in any war as a means of increasing the volume of the "vet's voice" to drown out all other voices whose point of view differs from theirs. That is manipulative, disingenous, and counter-productive, especially when it is done around the times of the military holidays.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 03:47 PM

In that case, dear GUEST you should be equally willing to castigate folks like Bobbert who have posted threads on Chicken Hawks as ones who should not talk about the impending conflict, and claiming that most veterans do not back the Bush Administration on Iraq. Coming late to this issue, you should know that what you have observed is a reaction and not a premptive strike. Not to explore this would be manipulative, disengenous, and very counter-productive...

And believe me (or my previous posts) the prior issues of Viet Nam do not cloud any judgement of mine on any of the current conflicts, but again you might want to examine Bobberts comments for the magic words "quagmire" and "Viet Nam" to see who is really emeshed in the past. The vast majority of the folks who respond to those type of code words are usually not veterans...

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 03:54 PM

More windmill tilting Claymore?

I find it impossible to take a person seriously who brags about gleefully assaulting "hippies" for "spitting on him" and getting away with it. But hey, that's just me.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 04:12 PM

Nooo, actually you're lucky it wasn't you...

Subject: RE: BS: Are we really Viet Nam Veterans?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 02 - 06:05 PM

When intelligence fails you...