History of the Vietnam war for people with attention deficit disorder - Page 3

August · 10-14-11, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP

Then what do you call Agent Orange? Likewise the execution of hostages seems to be as much of a rogue activity as, say, the My Lai massacre.

We used Agent Orange in Afghanistan? Talk about revisionism.

And let's not compare using something not designed to kill anything but foliage with chemical agents the Soviets used that were specifically designed to kill human beings. Now surely you won't claim that was a "rouge activity" will you?

Dowly · 10-14-11, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

And let's not compare using something not designed to kill anything but foliage with chemical agents the Soviets used that were specifically designed to kill human beings.

Does it really matter what it was designed to do? I mean, Zyklon B wasn't
designed to kill people either.

CCIP · 10-14-11, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dowly

Does it really matter what it was designed to do? I mean, Zyklon B wasn't
designed to kill people either.

+1

August · 10-14-11, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dowly

Does it really matter what it was designed to do? I mean, Zyklon B wasn't
designed to kill people either.

Yeah I'd say it does.

Look fellas. My father died from cancer and other medical problems the government has determined was caused by exposure to Agent Orange during his tour of duty in Vietnam so I have far more reason than any of you to abhor the stuff but the fact of the matter is it wasn't employed to kill people and if we knew then what we know now about the stuff we wouldn't have used it.

You can't say that about the Germans use of Zyklon B or the Soviets use of Yellow Rain in Afghanistan.

TarJak · 10-14-11, 09:23 PM

The bit that annoys me a lot about the OP is the complete lack of any mention of the contribution of countries like South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Soviet Union, Taiwan and China, to the conflict.

Whether it's revisionist is debatable, but its certainly biased and lacking in some salient facts.

Not least that the US could have avoided the whole affair in 1945 if it hadn't supported its allies desire to regain their former colonies, instead of supporting indigenous independence and self determination.

Sailor Steve · 10-14-11, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Well you may call it revisionism Steve but there are a whole lot of people who feel that war was indeed lost at home.

Of course it was lost at home. We could have won it hands-down. Then what? Occupy a country that doesn't want us? For how long? Remember Wellington's comments when the British Parliament asked him to take over the War of 1812?

What we did was help out a dictator against a freely elected government (or another dictator, depending on whose version you believe), and whichever you choose it's pointless, because we did it not to help anyone in Vietnam but to fight against "The Godless Communists". We had no business being there in the first place, and the war was lost at home when people began to realize that truth. It wasn't the hippies or the protestors or the draft-dodgers who were the problem - it was the lying, self-serving politicians who, God help us all, probably really believed the lies they told and thought they were doing the right thing.

Kongo Otto · 10-14-11, 11:01 PM

Ok and what has this all to do with attention deficit disorder?
Me who has a sister with this really severe disease finds it utter disgusting that this disease is used for nothing else than stupid political discussions!!!

August · 10-14-11, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TarJak

The bit that annoys me a lot about the OP is the complete lack of any mention of the contribution of countries like South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Soviet Union, Taiwan and China, to the conflict.

That's not exactly true. Except for Australia and NZ every one of those countries is mentioned at least once.

Quote:

Whether it's revisionist is debatable, but its certainly biased and lacking in some salient facts.

Of course it's biased and certainly doesn't mention every battle and incident that occurred over the 20 years it lasted.

August · 10-14-11, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kongo Otto

Ok and what has this all to do with attention deficit disorder?
Me who has a sister with this really severe disease finds it utter disgusting that this disease is used for nothing else than stupid political discussions!!!

Calm down pal. If you have a beef with the name of the article then take it up with the author.

August · 10-14-11, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

...it was the lying, self-serving politicians who, God help us all, probably really believed the lies they told and thought they were doing the right thing.

You're probably right but then again is it really "lying" when one believes what they are saying?

Kongo Otto · 10-14-11, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Calm down pal. If you have a beef with the name of the article then take it up with the author.

I dont have to taking it up with anyone, i just said what i had to say.
Nothing personal against you.
In my eyes the author has diqusalified himself with his Tagline from his article, not more and not less.

August · 10-14-11, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kongo Otto

I dont have to taking it up with anyone, i just said what i had to say.
Nothing personal against you.
In my eyes the author has diqusalified himself with his Tagline from his article, not more and not less.

It's a free country. You are entitled to your opinion..

Kongo Otto · 10-14-11, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

It's a free country. You are entitled to your opinion..

And you to yours,that's good so.
I disagree with a few parts including the tagline in this article but anyways when he wants it to say so then he should do it.
I just find it disturbing using severe diseases totally out of context.

TarJak · 10-15-11, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

That's not exactly true. Except for Australia and NZ every one of those countries is mentioned at least once.

Mentioned they may be, but not in any way directed at their contribution to the conflict (outside the mention of Soviet influence).

Each of these countires had people on the ground in the conflict all making a contribution to the effort for one side or another. Reading this account one would assume only American and Vietnamese forces were involved, which they certainly were not.

10-15-11, 03:11 AM

Quote:

You're probably right but then again is it really "lying" when one believes what they are saying?

When politicians involved have since said they knew it was false at the time then yes it is lying.

Quote:

Never mind, I'm just a cranky old fart.

No, the author of the opinion piece is a cranky old fart, the sort who still sits round doing a Waterfront dialogue on the whole sad episode.

10-14-11, 09:23 PM	#35
TarJak Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,052 Downloads: 150 Uploads: 8	The bit that annoys me a lot about the OP is the complete lack of any mention of the contribution of countries like South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Soviet Union, Taiwan and China, to the conflict. Whether it's revisionist is debatable, but its certainly biased and lacking in some salient facts. Not least that the US could have avoided the whole affair in 1945 if it hadn't supported its allies desire to regain their former colonies, instead of supporting indigenous independence and self determination.

10-14-11, 11:01 PM	#37
Kongo Otto Commodore Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Augsburg / Germany Posts: 631 Downloads: 203 Uploads: 0	Ok and what has this all to do with attention deficit disorder? Me who has a sister with this really severe disease finds it utter disgusting that this disease is used for nothing else than stupid political discussions!!!