that's interesting. he was man enough to say that the free fire zones and the practice of dropping grenades into bunkers, which often contained women and children, was abominable. kudos to kerry. <br><br>"Tribal sovereignty means that, it's sovereign. You're a—you've been given sovereignty, and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And, therefore, the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities." dubya 8.6.04
The Vietnam War was a war unlike any that the US has ever fought. The betrayals, lies, misdirections, malfeasance, incompetence, etc., etc. that marred the fighting of the war was horrific. But even more so was the purpose of the war, a post-imperial imperial conflict between two hegemonic powers, with the "locals" in their turn fighting a war of liberation from imperialism, as they had been for a couple of hundred years, against the Chinese, against the French, against the Japanese, against the French again, and finally against the US. By comparison, the invasion of Iraq is an unproblematic piece of cake--and you know I don't think that's true by a long shot. Beyond My Lai, I don't have hard evidence of atrocities. There's lots of anecdotal reports, though. I repeat: read Herr's Dispatches.<br><br>Now, none of this should take away from the courage and dedication of the soldiers who fought in Vietnam and did so professionally. They were indeed following orders, even when the orders made no sense. The anti-war movement of the mid-sixties was erroneous in vilifying the soldiers rather than or together with the policy the soldiers were implementing. The most important turning point away from that vilification was the organization of the Vietnam Veterans Agains the War. It took a great deal of courage and dedication for those soldiers to come back and challenge the policy while at the same time honoring their fellow soldiers. Those of us in the anti-war movement who were not veterans learned a lot (putting it mildly here) from those guys who came back from Vietnam horrified at what they had been required to do by a vicious policy. I honot Kerry as one of those people who were instrumental in changing the tenor of the anti-war movement.<br><br>
_________________________ MACTECHubi dolor ibi digitus
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>a post-imperial imperial conflict between two hegemonic powers, with the "locals" in their turn fighting a war of liberation from imperialism<p><hr></blockquote><p> Sums it up very well, if in fact a handful of words can be said to adequately describe something as monstrously large and all-consuming as a war. For me, at least, it aptly identifies how Vietnam was an ungodly sum of different protracted struggles waged on different fronts, conducted for a disparate series of reasons...<br><br>Anyway, good post. I wish all of you guys down there the best of luck in casting your vote when the time comes.<br><br>max<br>[color:red]EGG</font color=red><br>Moments & more<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by MaxMacDonald on 08/26/04 09:39 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
Well said yoyo. The continued rewriting of history is changing what the Vietnam war meant to the US. You have it right . Incredibly it now appears we could have won that war if there had not been so many anti-war pussies running around trying to end it. <br><br>If not for Kerry and the veterans coming back like him who spoke out that war would have dragged on. A couple of months or a couple of years. What a waste. <br><br>The fact the bits of his Senate testimony are being used against him boggles the mind. He was more heroic in his Senate testimony then when he won the medals. At least it was more important to the entire country.<br><br><br><br><br>paper cuts hurt
I agree on all counts. The heroism of those soldiers who came back and spoke up against the war was tremendous. And the idea that you could win a war of that kind is just absurd. We'd still be there. I've been re-reading MAchiavelli's The Prince for a class I'm teaching, and am struck once again by his wisdom: [color:blue]For in truth there is no sure method of holding such cities [i. e. city-states that have known self-government, which Machiavelli then calls the city's "freedom"] except by destruction. Anyone who becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it may expect to be destroyed by it; for such a city may always justify rebellion in the name of liberty and its ancient institutions. These are not forgotten either through passage of time or through benefits received. Despite any actions or provisions one may take, if the inhabitants are not divided and dispersed, they will not forget that name and those institution, and they will quickly have recourse to them at every chance, as Pisa did after a hundred years of servitude under the Florentines.</font color=blue><br><br>
_________________________ MACTECHubi dolor ibi digitus
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>The Vietnam War was a war unlike any that the US has ever fought. The betrayals, lies, misdirections, malfeasance, incompetence, etc., etc. that marred the fighting of the war was horrific.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Well, the war on "terror" is off to a good start with Guantanamo and Abu Gharib. It's another war unlike any other the US has fought. Looking back in 40 years I'm sure people will be amazed to see how akward this situation is.<br><br>Basically, we have thousands of people in Guantanamo held illegally by the US. We have two countries invaded. One of them turned out to be completely unjustified: Iraq, since they neither have anything to do with Al Qaeda or WMDs. Although the war is officially over, the fighting is in it's highest ever level. More people die and more bullets are fired Today, than any other day since the war started. The situation is [censored]! We have thousands of soldiers who took off their uniforms, but kept their rifles and try to fight off what they believe are the invaders: US troops. The US has created 10 times more enemies than it had before the war on terror has started. Obviously, it's not like something we couldn't see happening back than. When you get a kick, you don't ease the situation by kicking somebody else. That's how pub fights start. The US is soooo lucky that the other Arab countries are so patient. If they had the nature of the current US government we would be in WW3 already.<br><br>The international opinion of the US, especially since the Iraq war has started, and followed by the ABu Gharib incidents is the lowest in the US history. There is no credibility whatsoever. The hundreds of incidents when the Bush led US has acted like an older brother, who can bully the younger one, their allies is just turning off all simphaty for the US. Let me give you an example. Before the Iraq war, the US asked Hungary if they can fly over the airspace of Hungary. Although Hungary was/is an ally, for other reasons, they replied no. The US, said, ooops. Sorry, we already did. What is that? You can't just break international law everytime it suits you just because you can. It's ridiculous.<br><br>I hope this attitude changes with the elections. I have high hopes for the USA!<br><br>
_________________________ Check out my sites on ads and design.
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.