Originally Posted by Deputy

kiwi2005: I was there in 68-69 during Tet as infantry in the Mekong Delta (9th Infantry Division). I have read the book you referred to. I suppose I should qualify that during MY TIME in Nam in MY UNIT, drugs were almost non-existent. I was in a combat unit that was VERY active as far as going out in the field. The only guys who had drug problems in our unit were the medics (morphine). After patching together so many broken bodies of their friends, many times morphine was the only way to keep their sanity. The only whorehouses I knew about (never got to them as I was wounded and evaced before my R&R) were in Saigon or at the R&R centers in and out of country. Nobody was crazy enough to stick their doodad into local whores, as the diseases they had were very penicillin-resistant. We didn't want to catch anything that delayed our return home ;)

Please don't base your opinion of VietNam troops on ONE book written by someone who is a journalist. I have read some reviews about his book from other vets and journalists who question the content of the book.
Example (from Amazon.com):
Reviewer: Keith Nolan "author of RIPCORD, etc" (St Louis, MO) -
Like author Mark Baker, I'm not a veteran. I have, however, spent the last twenty-five years interviewing Vietnam veterans about their experiences in the war, and have published a number of non-fiction books on the subject. Not surprisingly, the veterans I've had the opportunity to speak with have described the war to me from a multitude of perspectives. There were those who believed in the war and those who didn't, those who served in units with good leadership and good morale and those who didn't, those who saw atrocities and those who didn't, those who used drugs and those who didn't, etc., etc., etc.
With that in mind, I'd be curious as to how Mark Baker managed to find such a one-sided collection of veterans. Everyone in NAM seems to have soldiered in a demoralized unit with incompetent or crazed leaders in which drug abuse and atrocities were standard operating procedure.
Hmmmmm, very suspicious. It seems that Baker must have thrown out every interview he did with veterans who served proudly in good units, or who saw both the good and bad sides of human nature in the war. How else to explain the unrelentingly negative parade of stories in NAM? Baker somehow managed to find more stories of sadism and murder in the handful of interviews he did than in the thousands I've done.
Many of the stories don't even ring true. Either Baker spoke with veterans with a proclivity for exaggeration, or some of the guys he interviewed weren't even veterans to begin with.
In sum, NAM is one of the most dishonest books ever published about the American combat soldier in Vietnam.
-------------------------------------
See what I mean? :)

Dep

Originally Posted by Dowly

@Danelov: I´ve never seen accurate and confirmed figures of Soviet losses against Finns. All I find is that figure and the phrase "Estimates of Soviet losses vary greatly". From that 48,000 up to half a million.

From Axishistory.com;

Killed in action Died in hospital

Commanders 6.000 802

NCOs 9.611 1.436

Men 54.215 12.185

Rank not known 1.388 1.869

Total 71.214 16.292


And those figures are from the Winter War. Tho, I cant say are those figures true or false.

Originally Posted by Deputy

And getting back to the reason this thread exists...

"How many years now have we been there? Has anything really changed? Is Iraq a peaceful nation AFTER the capture of Sadaam? What defines a peaceful nation?"

I love these comments! If you check US history it took a VERY long time for "peace" to be achieved here during and after the Revolutionary War. Writing the Constitution took a LOT longer than Iraq has done. We even had ANOTHER war where we fought among ourselves to straighten things out. I think we have become a "fast food/instant gratification" society where we want a war won and peace and prosperity to be started IMMEDIATELY. That just isn't the way it works with human beings. Throw in the fact that neighboring governments are doing their best to PREVENT Iraq from being peaceful and stable and nobody should be surprised that peace hasn't been achieved in Iraq yet. The best proposal I have heard is the division of Iraq into 3 states with Kurds, Suunis and Shiite ruling each state. Works for us with 50 states...should work for them. :)

Dep

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

That last sentence has no logic behind it whatsoever. Iraqi people are totally different that you or I and there is no proof behind it.

It is a war crime to attack another nation and to establish your own form of government there without proper provocation from the originating nation. Iraq possed no threat the the US and didn't send Al Qaeda to bomb the trade towers. This war was started by a madman in the Whitehouse with a personal grudge against Sadaam and the Iraqi people from his father's previous reign as the president. This war has no civil ground to walk on and no fact to base merritt with either.

Who the hell gave Bush the right to go into another country and establish a form of government there that they never wanted in the first place? The Iraqis have stated and stated again and again that they don't want our help or our greedy western government in their country. This is the wish of those people. Why hasn't our government left yet? I'll tell you why...Because the government can't accept the fact that the Iraqis don't appreciate Bush and his military coming into their country, blowing up their schools & hospitals, shooting & bombing their innocent people, and removing their culture from existence, only to be replaced by a stupid naive one like what the US currently has.

Bush refuses to leave until he has brainwashed them all into acceptence and those that don't follow Herr Bush's way are to be considered a terrorist and to be shot. It's as simple as that! It's obviously martial law in Iraq and will be until they accpet their new enforced way of life. Bush is no better than Hitler and no better than Milosovich!

Originally Posted by August

:rotfl: You really have no concept of reality Subman. As someone already mentioned, you're like a spokesman for the GoP as to why people shouldn't elect Democrats.

Originally Posted by VipertheSniper

Ok that last paragraph of Subserpent is really something I don't agree with, although I'm by no means a Bush supporter. But quoting the whole thing together and discarding EVERYTHING he said with :"you've got no concept of reality" when the other things were true, like you did August, is something which shows a lack of will to discuss it.

And I've yet to see a survey that says the Iraqis wanted a democracy before Saddam was removed. Did anyone ask them?
I've yet to see some credible evidence that Iraq under Saddam in 2003 posed a threat to the US, and even then, an invasion is out of question by international law, unless the US would've been attacked by Saddam beforehand.
What's more, you can't justify the means with the outcome you dream of, especially when you're the agressor and have achieved nothing but to turn a nation into chaos and civil war.

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

You've got a point Viper! Why does August not want to address my point with anything more than a cheap shot to the gut with his famous, "You have no concept of reality" line? :hmm:

Perhaps I struck a nerve and he has to admit to himself that I am right and he is wrong. Therefore he has nothing better to say or facts to come up with to prove me wrong. No wonder I feel the way I do, no one has proven me wrong or what I claim to be UNtrue! Show the proof in the future and quit with all the short, "SubSerpent is crazy" comments. It's not crazy from my viewpoint, so therefore, if your are going to call me crazy you need to prove it in the future.

Originally Posted by ASWnut101

hmmm, and what of your "I've got more posts than you" line? That somehow makes you smarter and better than others?