451–460 of 624 posts
some thoughts on the Viet Nam war.
A whole lot of excess words here, because the key point was here: “The US […] supported the French return to Viet Nam.” It was a US continuation of the reassertion of French imperialism, and as long as that imperialism continued, Hanoi wasn’t looking to roll over and avoid conflict, but to win it. Which, you know, they did. The opportunity to avoid the war was for the US not to try to take over the failed French impe…
The photo https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-StC-dVAdOns/YK081DEgPdI/AAAAAAAAd... is probably a captured M16 since, AFAIK, Vietnam used AK-47. What impressed me the most: "Using home-brewed chemicals, they developed their pictures in the open air or in underground tunnels" if by chemicals to develop photos in open air means no need for a dark room, that is really not something easy to do with then available technology. It is…
> Also "The Americans denuded the landscape with chemicals to deny cover to the Viet Cong." means chemical weapons. I believe the distinction is that Agent Orange was not used as a weapon per se, in that it wasn't applied to people, but rather was used to destroy plants. Please note I'm not making any claims about the ethics of its use.
"I just set your house on fire to flush you out of it so I could kill you. I didn't intend the fire as a weapon itself."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quite a coincidence. My dad was an HM3 on the USS Frontier from 1964 to 1967. He also passed in 2016. He never talked much about his service though. I only remember one story he told where US soldiers were issued bullet proof vests for the first time, and they chose to try them out by shooting each other with M16s. The result wasn't pretty.
Fascinating. I wonder what the psychology is there. I saw a Plymouth Superbird a couple years ago that had “original damage”. It looked like it had been stolen and taken on a joyride. No straight body panels, scratches everywhere. The story went that some kid got drafted and figured he was never coming home so he spent his life savings on the fastest car he could and tried to have as much fun as possible. I assume it…
The company supplied us with kevlar gloves.
He took a drywall knife, and with all his might, propelled the knife into his hand.
He was know as Kevlar Ken from then on.
My ex-wife Grandmother had spent over 10 years (1964-1975) in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia as a reporter on the Vietnamese side during the Vietnam War and consecutive conflicts (Vietnamese intervention in Cambodia 1978). She was the first European to walk all length of Ho Chi Minh trail, lived in Saigon undercover during American occupation and wrote couple of books about the Vietnam Wars. She was telling a lot of stor…
Which Vietnamese side?
I have a friend who served as a tank gunner in Vietnam. Has was wounded and sent home. He ended up with 4 teeth left after his jaw has been shot. He refused to accept that the US lost. No amount of reasoning would make him budge on that opinion. I dropped the subject as it was a risk to our friendship. I understand where he is coming from though. To have lost so many friends in addition to his personal injury, it wou…
Millions of innocent people died for nothing, and the US learned nothing, and did it all over again many times, because so many Americans, like your friend, were unwilling to concede that there was anything wrong with Vietnam.
Suppose your friend were instead an injured Al Qaeda member who felt Al Qaeda was right. Would you accept that?
But the US has killed _hundreds_ of times as many innocent people as Al Qaeda - ten times as many just in Vietnam.
Is the trend of "publish with sensational title, switch to benign version to continue growth" creeping into HN or is it the fate
The US is repeatedly on the wrong side of history. And they cannot even face that. Red scare. Supporting neo-liberal-to-fascist govts. Yelling democracy but then killing democratically chosen representatives when they do not "suit de US likings". Bitching about some "meddling" in their election when the history is full of US meddling in democratic process of other nations. Giving "foreign aid" to apartheid regimes. U…
The US is repeatedly on the wrong side of history. And they cannot even face that. Red scare. Supporting neo-liberal-to-fascist govts. Yelling democracy but then killing democratically chosen representatives when they do not "suit de US likings". Bitching about some "meddling" in their election when the history is full of US meddling in democratic process of other nations. Giving "foreign aid" to apartheid regimes. U…
Yes, the world is a chaotic reflexive system and trying to manipulate it always creates unintended consequences. The US absolutely does dumb stuff all the time, and power always gets abused. But for a contrarian view on the “US Bad” narrative, check out a book called The Accidental Superpower Here’s a good summary of the book: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/your-book-review-the-a... It presents an interesting…
Backup these results with data is not the way to go. You have to proof the same results could have not been achieved without force. Which is impossible to proof IMO
The US is repeatedly on the wrong side of history. And they cannot even face that. Red scare. Supporting neo-liberal-to-fascist govts. Yelling democracy but then killing democratically chosen representatives when they do not "suit de US likings". Bitching about some "meddling" in their election when the history is full of US meddling in democratic process of other nations. Giving "foreign aid" to apartheid regimes. U…
US misunderstood the history of Vietnam and the goals of the belligerents. Vietcong also misunderstood the US.
Ho Chi Minh and Vietcong were nationalists first, communists second. US feared the domino effect that had no change of happening with Vietnam. Vietnam would not side with China for any reason and China was prepared to go to war against Russia if Russia got too much influence in Vietnam.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
~~False.~~ Their does not need to be a right side just because there is a, or even many, wrong. Everyone can be shitty. e: not false, I misread.
Wouldn't your view be in agreement with the poster? They aren't saying they personally believe there must be a right side but that the metaphor implies it.