PDA

View Full Version : Abuses uncovered in every division that operated in Vietnam


AlonzoMourning23
08-06-2006, 07:53 PM
The men of B Company were in a dangerous state of mind. They had lost five men in a firefight the day before. The morning of Feb. 8, 1968, brought unwelcome orders to resume their sweep of the countryside, a green patchwork of rice paddies along Vietnam's central coast.

They met no resistance as they entered a nondescript settlement in Quang Nam province. So Jamie Henry, a 20-year-old medic, set his rifle down in a hut, unfastened his bandoliers and lighted a cigarette.


Just then, the voice of a lieutenant crackled across the radio. He reported that he had rounded up 19 civilians, and wanted to know what to do with them. Henry later recalled the company commander's response:

Kill anything that moves.

Henry stepped outside the hut and saw a small crowd of women and children. Then the shooting began.

Moments later, the 19 villagers lay dead or dying.

Back home in California, Henry published an account of the slaughter and held a news conference to air his allegations. Yet he and other Vietnam veterans who spoke out about war crimes were branded traitors and fabricators. No one was ever prosecuted for the massacre.

Now, nearly 40 years later, declassified Army files show that Henry was telling the truth — about the Feb. 8 killings and a series of other atrocities by the men of B Company.

The files are part of a once-secret archive, assembled by a Pentagon task force in the early 1970s, that shows that confirmed atrocities by U.S. forces in Vietnam were more extensive than was previously known.

The documents detail 320 alleged incidents that were substantiated by Army investigators — not including the most notorious U.S. atrocity, the 1968 My Lai massacre.

Though not a complete accounting of Vietnam war crimes, the archive is the largest such collection to surface to date. About 9,000 pages, it includes investigative files, sworn statements by witnesses and status reports for top military brass.

The records describe recurrent attacks on ordinary Vietnamese — families in their homes, farmers in rice paddies, teenagers out fishing. Hundreds of soldiers, in interviews with investigators and letters to commanders, described a violent minority who murdered, raped and tortured with impunity.

Abuses were not confined to a few rogue units, a Times review of the files found. They were uncovered in every Army division that operated in Vietnam.

Retired Brig. Gen. John H. Johns, a Vietnam veteran who served on the task force, says he once supported keeping the records secret but now believes they deserve wide attention in light of alleged attacks on civilians and abuse of prisoners in Iraq.

"We can't change current practices unless we acknowledge the past," says Johns, 78.

Among the substantiated cases in the archive:

•Â*Â*Seven massacres from 1967 through 1971 in which at least 137 civilians died.

•Â*Â*Seventy-eight other attacks on noncombatants in which at least 57 were killed, 56 wounded and 15 sexually assaulted.

•Â*Â*One hundred forty-one instances in which U.S. soldiers tortured civilian detainees or prisoners of war with fists, sticks, bats, water or electric shock.

Investigators determined that evidence against 203 soldiers accused of harming Vietnamese civilians or prisoners was strong enough to warrant formal charges. These "founded" cases were referred to the soldiers' superiors for action.

Ultimately, 57 of them were court-martialed and just 23 convicted, the records show.

Fourteen received prison sentences ranging from six months to 20 years, but most won significant reductions on appeal. The stiffest sentence went to a military intelligence interrogator convicted of committing indecent acts on a 13-year-old girl in an interrogation hut in 1967.

He served seven months of a 20-year term, the records show.

Many substantiated cases were closed with a letter of reprimand, a fine or, in more than half the cases, no action at all.

There was little interest in prosecuting Vietnam war crimes, says Steven Chucala, who in the early 1970s was legal advisor to the commanding officer of the Army's Criminal Investigation Division. He says he disagreed with the attitude but understood it.

"Everyone wanted Vietnam to go away," says Chucala, now a civilian attorney for the Army at Ft. Belvoir in Virginia.

In many cases, suspects had left the service. The Army did not attempt to pursue them, despite a written opinion in 1969 by Robert E. Jordan III, then the Army's general counsel, that ex-soldiers could be prosecuted through courts-martial, military commissions or tribunals.

"I don't remember why it didn't go anywhere," says Jordan, now a lawyer in Washington.

Top Army brass should have demanded a tougher response, says retired Lt. Gen. Robert G. Gard, who oversaw the task force as a brigadier general at the Pentagon in the early 1970s.

"We could have court-martialed them but didn't," Gard says of soldiers accused of war crimes. "The whole thing is terribly disturbing."

Early-Warning System

In March 1968, members of the 23rd Infantry Division slaughtered about 500 Vietnamese civilians in the hamlet of My Lai. Reporter Seymour Hersh exposed the massacre the following year.

By then, Gen. William C. Westmoreland, commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam at the time of My Lai, had become Army chief of staff. A task force was assembled from members of his staff to monitor war crimes allegations and serve as an early-warning system.

Over the next few years, members of the Vietnam War Crimes Working Group reviewed Army investigations and wrote reports and summaries for military brass and the White House.

The records were declassified in 1994, after 20 years as required by law, and moved to the National Archives in College Park, Md., where they went largely unnoticed.

The Times examined most of the files and obtained copies of about 3,000 pages — about a third of the total — before government officials removed them from the public shelves, saying they contained personal information that was exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.

In addition to the 320 substantiated incidents, the records contain material related to more than 500 alleged atrocities that Army investigators could not prove or that they discounted.

Johns says many war crimes did not make it into the archive. Some were prosecuted without being identified as war crimes, as required by military regulations. Others were never reported.

In a letter to Westmoreland in 1970, an anonymous sergeant described widespread, unreported killings of civilians by members of the 9th Infantry Division in the Mekong Delta — and blamed pressure from superiors to generate high body counts.

"A batalion [sic] would kill maybe 15 to 20 [civilians] a day. With 4 batalions in the brigade that would be maybe 40 to 50 a day or 1200 to 1500 a month, easy," the unnamed sergeant wrote. "If I am only 10% right, and believe me it's lots more, then I am trying to tell you about 120-150 murders, or a My Lay [sic] each month for over a year."

A high-level Army review of the letter cited its "forcefulness," "sincerity" and "inescapable logic," and urged then-Secretary of the Army Stanley R. Resor to make sure the push for verifiable body counts did not "encourage the human tendency to inflate the count by violating established rules of engagement."

Investigators tried to find the letter writer and "prevent his complaints from reaching" then-Rep. Ronald V. Dellums (D-Oakland), according to an August 1971 memo to Westmoreland.

The records do not say whether the writer was located, and there is no evidence in the files that his complaint was investigated further.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-vietnam6aug06,0,6350517.story

The article is actually 8 pages long. The last 6, which I didn't post but can be found if you go to the link, detail many of the events. They sound like things the Japanese did to civilians during WW2. I cut out about 2/3rds of it, you can read the pieces I cut in the above link:

On Oct. 8, 1967, after a firefight near Chu Lai, members of his company spotted a 12-year-old boy out in a rainstorm. He was unarmed and clad only in shorts.

"Somebody caught him up on a hill, and they brought him down and the lieutenant asked who wanted to kill him," Henry told investigators.

Two volunteers stepped forward. One kicked the boy in the stomach. The other took him behind a rock and shot him, according to Henry's statement. They tossed his body in a river and reported him as an enemy combatant killed in action.....

Three days later, B Company detained and beat an elderly man suspected of supporting the enemy. He had trouble keeping pace as the soldiers marched him up a steep hill.

"When I turned around, two men had him, one guy had his arms, one guy had his legs and they threw him off the hill onto a bunch of rocks," Henry's statement said.

On Oct. 15, some of the men took a break during a large-scale "search-and-destroy" operation. Henry said he overheard a lieutenant on the radio requesting permission to test-fire his weapon, and went to see what was happening.

He found two soldiers using a Vietnamese man for target practice, Henry said. They had discovered the victim sleeping in a hut and decided to kill him for sport.

"Everybody was taking pot shots at him, seeing how accurate they were," Henry said in his statement....

Staff Sgt. Wilson Bullock told an investigator at Ft. Carson, Colo., that his platoon had captured 19 "women, children, babies and two or three very old men" during the Tet offensive.

"All of these people were lined up and killed," he said in a sworn statement. "When it, the shooting, stopped, I began to return to the site when I observed a naked Vietnamese female run from the house to the huddle of people, saw that her baby had been shot. She picked the baby up and was then shot and the baby shot again."..

Donald R. Richardson said he was at a command post outside the hamlet when he heard a platoon leader on the radio ask what to do with 19 civilians.

"The cpt said something about kill anything that moves and the lt on the other end said 'Their [sic] moving,' " according to Richardson's sworn account. "Just then the gunfire was heard."

William J. Nieset, a rifle squad leader, told investigators that he was standing next to a radio operator and heard Reh say: "My instructions from higher are to kill everything that moves."

Robert D. Miller said he was the radio operator for Lt. Johnny Mack Carter, commander of the 3rd Platoon. Miller said that when Carter asked Reh what to do with the 19 civilians, the captain instructed him to follow the "operation order."

Carter immediately sought two volunteers to shoot the civilians, Miller said under oath.

"I believe everyone knew what was going to happen," he said, "so no one volunteered except one guy known only to me as 'Crazy.' "

"A few minutes later, while the Vietnamese were huddled around in a circle Lt Carter and 'Crazy' started shooting them with their M-16's on automatic," Miller's statement says.

Investigators wrote they could not find Pvt. Frank Bonilla, the man known as "Crazy." The Times reached him at his home on Oahu in March.

Bonilla, now 58 and a hotel worker, says he recalls an order to kill the civilians, but says he does not remember who issued it. "Somebody had a radio, handed it to someone, maybe a lieutenant, said the man don't want to see nobody standing," he said.


All those incidents were investigated and the military concluded:

The Criminal Investigation Division assigned Warrant Officer Jonathan P. Coulson in Los Angeles to complete the investigation and write a final report on the "Henry Allegation." He sent his findings to headquarters in Washington in January 1974.

Evidence showed that the massacre did occur, the report said. The investigation also confirmed all but one of the other killings that Henry had described. The one exception was the elderly man thrown off a cliff. Coulson said it could not be determined whether the victim was alive when soldiers tossed him.


But no actions were taken.

Rider
08-06-2006, 10:46 PM
To put the whole sordid matter into context it is necessary to remember that the Viet Cong and NVA killed somewhere in the neighborhood of 10,000 civilians every year of the war from about '68 onward. The NVA slaughtered over 3000 teachers, police and government workers in Hue City alone during Tet. Over one million Cambodians were murdered by the Communists after we left. This of course does not excuse American abuses.

AlonzoMourning23
08-06-2006, 10:59 PM
Well, the south was also very brutal and that was a reason many support the north. All sides killed many civilians, and well over 600,000, possibly even a million +, were killed. The u.s. killed the most as we had the most powerful weapons.

Though you can't blame cambodia on Vietnam. The Khmer Rouge actually had support from the u.s. and some other nations since they opposed Vietnam. Vietnam eventually invaded Cambodia (after border confrontations) and ended the genocide.

But, things like this show how our soldiers behave, and enable us to try to learn how to prevent such things in the future.

BoogyMan
08-07-2006, 07:03 AM
But, things like this show how our soldiers behave, and enable us to try to learn how to prevent such things in the future.

This shows how SOME behave, you are painting with a pretty broad brush there 'Zo.

Rider
08-08-2006, 04:42 PM
Zo- "Though you can't blame cambodia on Vietnam. The Khmer Rouge actually had support from the u.s. and some other nations since they opposed Vietnam."
I didn't blame the North Vietnamese. The Khmer Rouge were communists also. We may have given them some assistance, but we did not assist them during the slaughter after our pullout.

Rider
08-08-2006, 04:45 PM
Zo- "But, things like this show how our soldiers behave,..."

Not just "some" of our soldiers as Boogyman pointed out, but a tiny percentage. Usually about the same percentage as commit violent crimes in the overall population.

Nathan Brazil
08-09-2006, 07:41 PM
But, things like this show how our soldiers behave, and enable us to try to learn how to prevent such things in the future.

Uh huh. Yet another bucket of shit splashed on the US serviceman by someone who's trying to lose a war for us.

There were 54000 casualties in Viet Nam. That means there where what, over a million men in-country over the years? Now, if what was posted was a picture of how US troops behave themselves in a war zone, I must say they weren't very effective.

What's really being shown, once all the BS is peeled away, is that some troops had bad commanders. Which is what you expect when a college boy with no real military training or experience is pushed into a war zone in front of a bunch of conscripts. Some of 'em won't have any values, some of 'em won't be in charge, and some of 'em are going to be plain stupid.

It's the nature of armies throughout history to be rough with the civillian population, especially when that population is continuing to assist the enemy.

It's also natural for armies to sweep such events under the rug whenever possible. In modern times, such perfectly normal behavior is deemed politically unacceptable, unless you're a muslim.

Rider
08-09-2006, 08:18 PM
Hell Nathan, in the late sixties there were 600,000 men in country at any given moment. I imagine it was more like 4 or 5 million total.

Another huge factor was the overwhelming lack of a sense of purpose as the war dragged on. In 1966 (I think) LBJ wrote in his memoirs that he knew that the war could not be won as it was being fought, but that a pull out would ensure a landslide of victories for Republicans in coming elections. Consider the enormity of that statement! Better to send thousands of young men to their deaths and wreak mayhem and destruction on a nation than to risk losing power in Washington.

If I sound bitter, it's because I am.

PittsburghAfterDark
08-09-2006, 09:22 PM
You know zo I have one thing to say to you.

Go to hell.

Not only are you intent on disgracing every single branch of the military today for wrongdoing you need to go back and do it as a historical basis to reenforce your current bigotry.

You have zero idea what it's like to be asked to serve.Â*Â*You're a know nothing jackass who prattles on about abuses, attrocities, inequities etc. safely behind a keyboard.Â*Â*You have no idea how f'in lucky you are to live in a country where these men and women put their asses on the line for you to act like a complete imbecile.

I have news for you jack.Â*Â*You put 10,000,000... 5,000,000, 1,000,000 or even 10,000 people in any kind of organization you have criminals, rapists, drug users/abusers, sadists and just mentally ill people.Â*Â*Putting on a uniform and going through basic training does not remove those traits.

However morons like you think that putting on the uniform makes you a rapist, criminal, sadist and mentally ill.Â*Â*You are truly a sad person and you really have no idea the picture you paint of yourself every time you make posts like this.

Maybe I should start finding out if some headline worthy criminal is a registered Democrat or liberal so I can start painting a picture of them being dangerous to society the way you paint soldiers as dangerous to society.

Thank your lucky stars you're not face to face with me right now.

dsanthony
08-09-2006, 09:42 PM
The men of B Company were in a dangerous state of mind. They had lost five men in a firefight the day before. The morning of Feb. 8, 1968, brought unwelcome orders to resume their sweep of the countryside, a green patchwork of rice paddies along Vietnam's central coast.

They met no resistance as they entered a nondescript settlement in Quang Nam province. So Jamie Henry, a 20-year-old medic, set his rifle down in a hut, unfastened his bandoliers and lighted a cigarette.


Just then, the voice of a lieutenant crackled across the radio. He reported that he had rounded up 19 civilians, and wanted to know what to do with them. Henry later recalled the company commander's response:

Kill anything that moves.

Henry stepped outside the hut and saw a small crowd of women and children. Then the shooting began.

Moments later, the 19 villagers lay dead or dying.

Back home in California, Henry published an account of the slaughter and held a news conference to air his allegations. Yet he and other Vietnam veterans who spoke out about war crimes were branded traitors and fabricators. No one was ever prosecuted for the massacre.

Now, nearly 40 years later, declassified Army files show that Henry was telling the truth — about the Feb. 8 killings and a series of other atrocities by the men of B Company.

The files are part of a once-secret archive, assembled by a Pentagon task force in the early 1970s, that shows that confirmed atrocities by U.S. forces in Vietnam were more extensive than was previously known.

The documents detail 320 alleged incidents that were substantiated by Army investigators — not including the most notorious U.S. atrocity, the 1968 My Lai massacre.

Though not a complete accounting of Vietnam war crimes, the archive is the largest such collection to surface to date. About 9,000 pages, it includes investigative files, sworn statements by witnesses and status reports for top military brass.

The records describe recurrent attacks on ordinary Vietnamese — families in their homes, farmers in rice paddies, teenagers out fishing. Hundreds of soldiers, in interviews with investigators and letters to commanders, described a violent minority who murdered, raped and tortured with impunity.

Abuses were not confined to a few rogue units, a Times review of the files found. They were uncovered in every Army division that operated in Vietnam.

Retired Brig. Gen. John H. Johns, a Vietnam veteran who served on the task force, says he once supported keeping the records secret but now believes they deserve wide attention in light of alleged attacks on civilians and abuse of prisoners in Iraq.

"We can't change current practices unless we acknowledge the past," says Johns, 78.

Among the substantiated cases in the archive:

•Â*Â*Seven massacres from 1967 through 1971 in which at least 137 civilians died.

•Â*Â*Seventy-eight other attacks on noncombatants in which at least 57 were killed, 56 wounded and 15 sexually assaulted.

•Â*Â*One hundred forty-one instances in which U.S. soldiers tortured civilian detainees or prisoners of war with fists, sticks, bats, water or electric shock.

Investigators determined that evidence against 203 soldiers accused of harming Vietnamese civilians or prisoners was strong enough to warrant formal charges. These "founded" cases were referred to the soldiers' superiors for action.

Ultimately, 57 of them were court-martialed and just 23 convicted, the records show.

Fourteen received prison sentences ranging from six months to 20 years, but most won significant reductions on appeal. The stiffest sentence went to a military intelligence interrogator convicted of committing indecent acts on a 13-year-old girl in an interrogation hut in 1967.

He served seven months of a 20-year term, the records show.

Many substantiated cases were closed with a letter of reprimand, a fine or, in more than half the cases, no action at all.

There was little interest in prosecuting Vietnam war crimes, says Steven Chucala, who in the early 1970s was legal advisor to the commanding officer of the Army's Criminal Investigation Division. He says he disagreed with the attitude but understood it.

"Everyone wanted Vietnam to go away," says Chucala, now a civilian attorney for the Army at Ft. Belvoir in Virginia.

In many cases, suspects had left the service. The Army did not attempt to pursue them, despite a written opinion in 1969 by Robert E. Jordan III, then the Army's general counsel, that ex-soldiers could be prosecuted through courts-martial, military commissions or tribunals.

"I don't remember why it didn't go anywhere," says Jordan, now a lawyer in Washington.

Top Army brass should have demanded a tougher response, says retired Lt. Gen. Robert G. Gard, who oversaw the task force as a brigadier general at the Pentagon in the early 1970s.

"We could have court-martialed them but didn't," Gard says of soldiers accused of war crimes. "The whole thing is terribly disturbing."

Early-Warning System

In March 1968, members of the 23rd Infantry Division slaughtered about 500 Vietnamese civilians in the hamlet of My Lai. Reporter Seymour Hersh exposed the massacre the following year.

By then, Gen. William C. Westmoreland, commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam at the time of My Lai, had become Army chief of staff. A task force was assembled from members of his staff to monitor war crimes allegations and serve as an early-warning system.

Over the next few years, members of the Vietnam War Crimes Working Group reviewed Army investigations and wrote reports and summaries for military brass and the White House.

The records were declassified in 1994, after 20 years as required by law, and moved to the National Archives in College Park, Md., where they went largely unnoticed.

The Times examined most of the files and obtained copies of about 3,000 pages — about a third of the total — before government officials removed them from the public shelves, saying they contained personal information that was exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.

In addition to the 320 substantiated incidents, the records contain material related to more than 500 alleged atrocities that Army investigators could not prove or that they discounted.

Johns says many war crimes did not make it into the archive. Some were prosecuted without being identified as war crimes, as required by military regulations. Others were never reported.

In a letter to Westmoreland in 1970, an anonymous sergeant described widespread, unreported killings of civilians by members of the 9th Infantry Division in the Mekong Delta — and blamed pressure from superiors to generate high body counts.

"A batalion [sic] would kill maybe 15 to 20 [civilians] a day. With 4 batalions in the brigade that would be maybe 40 to 50 a day or 1200 to 1500 a month, easy," the unnamed sergeant wrote. "If I am only 10% right, and believe me it's lots more, then I am trying to tell you about 120-150 murders, or a My Lay [sic] each month for over a year."

A high-level Army review of the letter cited its "forcefulness," "sincerity" and "inescapable logic," and urged then-Secretary of the Army Stanley R. Resor to make sure the push for verifiable body counts did not "encourage the human tendency to inflate the count by violating established rules of engagement."

Investigators tried to find the letter writer and "prevent his complaints from reaching" then-Rep. Ronald V. Dellums (D-Oakland), according to an August 1971 memo to Westmoreland.

The records do not say whether the writer was located, and there is no evidence in the files that his complaint was investigated further.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-vietnam6aug06,0,6350517.story

The article is actually 8 pages long. The last 6, which I didn't post but can be found if you go to the link, detail many of the events. They sound like things the Japanese did to civilians during WW2. I cut out about 2/3rds of it, you can read the pieces I cut in the above link:

On Oct. 8, 1967, after a firefight near Chu Lai, members of his company spotted a 12-year-old boy out in a rainstorm. He was unarmed and clad only in shorts.

"Somebody caught him up on a hill, and they brought him down and the lieutenant asked who wanted to kill him," Henry told investigators.

Two volunteers stepped forward. One kicked the boy in the stomach. The other took him behind a rock and shot him, according to Henry's statement. They tossed his body in a river and reported him as an enemy combatant killed in action.....

Three days later, B Company detained and beat an elderly man suspected of supporting the enemy. He had trouble keeping pace as the soldiers marched him up a steep hill.

"When I turned around, two men had him, one guy had his arms, one guy had his legs and they threw him off the hill onto a bunch of rocks," Henry's statement said.

On Oct. 15, some of the men took a break during a large-scale "search-and-destroy" operation. Henry said he overheard a lieutenant on the radio requesting permission to test-fire his weapon, and went to see what was happening.

He found two soldiers using a Vietnamese man for target practice, Henry said. They had discovered the victim sleeping in a hut and decided to kill him for sport.

"Everybody was taking pot shots at him, seeing how accurate they were," Henry said in his statement....

Staff Sgt. Wilson Bullock told an investigator at Ft. Carson, Colo., that his platoon had captured 19 "women, children, babies and two or three very old men" during the Tet offensive.

"All of these people were lined up and killed," he said in a sworn statement. "When it, the shooting, stopped, I began to return to the site when I observed a naked Vietnamese female run from the house to the huddle of people, saw that her baby had been shot. She picked the baby up and was then shot and the baby shot again."..

Donald R. Richardson said he was at a command post outside the hamlet when he heard a platoon leader on the radio ask what to do with 19 civilians.

"The cpt said something about kill anything that moves and the lt on the other end said 'Their [sic] moving,' " according to Richardson's sworn account. "Just then the gunfire was heard."

William J. Nieset, a rifle squad leader, told investigators that he was standing next to a radio operator and heard Reh say: "My instructions from higher are to kill everything that moves."

Robert D. Miller said he was the radio operator for Lt. Johnny Mack Carter, commander of the 3rd Platoon. Miller said that when Carter asked Reh what to do with the 19 civilians, the captain instructed him to follow the "operation order."

Carter immediately sought two volunteers to shoot the civilians, Miller said under oath.

"I believe everyone knew what was going to happen," he said, "so no one volunteered except one guy known only to me as 'Crazy.' "

"A few minutes later, while the Vietnamese were huddled around in a circle Lt Carter and 'Crazy' started shooting them with their M-16's on automatic," Miller's statement says.

Investigators wrote they could not find Pvt. Frank Bonilla, the man known as "Crazy." The Times reached him at his home on Oahu in March.

Bonilla, now 58 and a hotel worker, says he recalls an order to kill the civilians, but says he does not remember who issued it. "Somebody had a radio, handed it to someone, maybe a lieutenant, said the man don't want to see nobody standing," he said.


All those incidents were investigated and the military concluded:

The Criminal Investigation Division assigned Warrant Officer Jonathan P. Coulson in Los Angeles to complete the investigation and write a final report on the "Henry Allegation." He sent his findings to headquarters in Washington in January 1974.

Evidence showed that the massacre did occur, the report said. The investigation also confirmed all but one of the other killings that Henry had described. The one exception was the elderly man thrown off a cliff. Coulson said it could not be determined whether the victim was alive when soldiers tossed him.


But no actions were taken.


Just curious. Do you have ANYTHING positive to say about the United States?

Nathan Brazil
08-09-2006, 10:53 PM
Another huge factor was the overwhelming lack of a sense of purpose as the war dragged on.

If you're not fighting a war to win it, wtf are you there for? The question makes perfect sense to just about anyone that's not a Democrat.

Better to send thousands of young men to their deaths and wreak mayhem and destruction on a nation than to risk losing power in Washington.

If I sound bitter, it's because I am.


You should be, I don't blame you a bit. I born when Kennedy was president, so I happily missed going to Viet Nam, but I volunteered for submarine rides later on.

BoogyMan
08-09-2006, 10:53 PM
Just curious.Â*Â*Do you have ANYTHING positive to say about the United States?


To add to DSAnthony's question, do you have ANYTHING positive to say about the United States or its military?

Rider
08-09-2006, 11:10 PM
Nathan- I arrived in the far east just as Nixon was beginning to pull troops out. Through a fortunate set of circumstances I never went in country. I had originally volunteered to go, but by the time I got over there I was thoroughly disgusted with the whole thing and relieved that I dodged that bullet. I lost quite a few good friends, though.
Just a bad deal all the way around. It's one reason I'm so adamant about winning in Iraq. I saw the same left wing BS during that time.

PittsburghAfterDark
08-11-2006, 10:08 PM
http://www.liberalscum.com/images/root_for_us.jpg

AlonzoMourning23
08-12-2006, 12:37 AM
PAD, your posts are the only guaranteed laugh on this site. Keep up the good work.

To add to DSAnthony's question, do you have ANYTHING positive to say about the United States or its military?

I've said positive things about the ideals of freedom, free speech, secularism etc. The military during the vietnam war? Depends if you are referring to the part that was controlling it or the part that was on the ground. I do have a vietnam vet as my avatar, and he's someone I think very highly of. I think highly of any vietnam vet who had similar priorities.

Nathan Brazil
08-12-2006, 01:04 AM
It's one reason I'm so adamant about winning in Iraq. I saw the same left wing BS during that time.

Oh, it's so transparently obvious what the treasonous little Democrats are trying to do with our presence in Iraq. They've been working from Day One to prevent a clear victory, and they're using the same tactics they used during Vietnam. They lie, they distort situations, and they automatically presume that the motivations of the United States are evil.

Now, they did that during Vietnam because as true ideological descendants of FDR they supported a communist victory in the Cold War. Why they're doing it now is a mystery. I mean, yeah, they don't mind getting thousands of Americans killed to regain the White House, that's a given, but for some reason I find it difficult to comprehend why NOW is working so assiduously for a Taliban victory.

(Unless they're certain fanatical muslims are like American males, and won't be able to believe a NOW member is a real female....)

dsanthony
08-12-2006, 01:17 AM
PAD, your posts are the only guaranteed laugh on this site. Keep up the good work.

To add to DSAnthony's question, do you have ANYTHING positive to say about the United States or its military?

I've said positive things about the ideals of freedom, free speech, secularism etc. The military during the vietnam war? Depends if you are referring to the part that was controlling it or the part that was on the ground. I do have a vietnam vet as my avatar, and he's someone I think very highly of. I think highly of any vietnam vet who had similar priorities.




Ok, how's this then. Please compare the US' conception of equal rights and justice to those of North Vietnam, the Iraqi insurgency, Hezbollah or the Al Quaeda murderers.

AlonzoMourning23
08-12-2006, 01:34 AM
Ok, how's this then.Â*Â*Please compare the US' conception of equal rights and justice to those of North Vietnam, the Iraqi insurgency, Hezbollah or the Al Quaeda murderers.


Well, in Vietnam our guy (Diem) arrested and executed opponents, and cancelled elections, which was the reason the north agreed to the division of Vietnam, when he realize Ho Chi Minh was going to win. Our actions lead to about a million civilian deaths, and resulted in a civil war far more destructive and violent than would have been possible without us. We neither supported nor opposed a side that supported equal rights and justice in Vietnam, but we opposed the one that had greater public support. Rural areas supported the north, while cities supported the South, and most lived in Rural areas.

Hezbollah has nothing to do with the u.s. Israel is not the u.s.

The Iraqi insurgency consists of nationalists, religious fundamentalists, hardcore terrorists etc. there is not even a loose ideology there, and many Iraqi groups have even turned on the like of Al Qaeda, as there has been incidents of nationalist and Islamic (but Iraqi) groups attacking foreign militants, mainly over the tendency for foreigners to target civilians.

Though the apparent suggestion that I support Al Qaeda, Hezbollah etc. has no basis in reality. It seems that anyone who wants to understand why something is the way it is, or want to understand what a group believes, is denounced as a supporter of them. The same goes for when someone suggest something may actually be wrong with our behavior.

dsanthony
08-12-2006, 02:05 AM
I asked you to compare NK, Hezb and other enemies of the US with our policies.

I posted in another thread a link of SOME of the US citizens killed (and intentionally targeted) by Hezb. The enemies of Israel are the enemies of the US.

AlonzoMourning23
08-12-2006, 02:27 AM
I asked you to compare NK, Hezb and other enemies of the US with our policies.

There's no reason to. I'm not supporting them, I'm not claiming they do that better than us. I'm not going to waste my time on some pointless exercise unless I think there's a reason to. The only reason you asked me is because you think I support these groups. It's like asking me to compare the condition of gay rights in the u.s. and those groups. There's no reason to waste my time typing that up.

Also, do you think I am an enemy of the U.S.? I know you think I'm detrimental, but do you actually think I'm an enemy?