posted on September 23, 2000 11:36:07 AM new
rawbunzel-sorry to hear about your first husband.....
No I wasn't down there (born '59) but I'm sure my older sisters were, they are 10-11 years older than I, and my brother was drafted, but didn't go, he sure wanted to, for whatever reasons he had.
posted on September 23, 2000 12:18:13 PM new
This thread is indeed the sadest one I have ever read.
I'm going to take my leave of it now but before I go for whoever served our country in that war or any war I want to say
Thank You. You will always have my utmost respect and I will teach my children of the sacrifice and valor of our vetrans and that what they suffered and sacrificed really mattered.
Oddish~ The Odd One
posted on September 23, 2000 03:47:27 PM new
I too remember the day my father left for Viet Nam as well as the day he came home. Unfortunately the strongest memory I have of him is several years later when he was found dead by "a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head". At least the Air Force recognized his illness as being a direct result of his time spent in Viet Nam and my mom did receive all benefits she would have received had he been killed over there, which in a way he was.
Jeanyu, I don't know you and never posted to you. But I really wish you would do some more research. I dont see where anyone on this thread has blamed Jane for the war, but rather for making it more hellish for a large number of soldiers. In a way I admire you for being able to forgive her. I cannot. I have no idea of her abilities as an actress as I refuse to watch anything and I mean anything with her in it. When a commercial for On Golden Pond would come on, I would change channels.
I can not excuse it as a childish prank! It went a little beyond the prank stage. Because of who she was, she had more influence than the regular student protestor. I don't believe she regretted using the anti-aircraft gun, just being photographed. Pictures say a thousand words and can come back to haunt you. I still believe she should be tried for treason and suffer the consequences of her actions which I believe directly resulted in the death of some of our brave military personnel.
posted on September 23, 2000 07:39:22 PM newConnibirch I'm sorry to read about your loss. Yours and the other post left here helps to remind us all again that the statistics from the casualties of the war never tell the whole story. There are so many more who continue to suffer the effects in so many ways and cold data compiled in "war records" will never tell the full story.
As to Jane Fonda, I've made my feelings clear - Many of us believe that she was responsible for the suffering and even deaths of some of our soldiers. At the very least she used her "celebrity" status against our country. I don't have feelings either way about forgiving her - but can't stomach the idea of her being honored for anything.
I agree this has been an incredibly sad thread - but, one that I think we've all taken something away from - so a powerful, meaningful thread too.
I have sincere gratitude to all of the veterans and family of veterans who posted here and for the sacrifices made by you and your families. Thank you all for sharing. Your words have put a face and a heartbeat into what would otherwise be cold statistics.
posted on September 23, 2000 11:10:04 PM new
TO ALL WHO POSTED HERE: Thank you. You have given me an invaluable education. The story behind the story is more horrendous and important than I could imagine.
If my post only added to your pain, I cannot hope for your forgiveness. But, if instead you can take the opportunity to remember a friend or loved one's hopes and dreams, their smile, their scent or their absolute innocence of mind and spirit before they were subjected to these inhumanities, I hope you will embrace them in your heart, and NEVER "put it behind" you or "move on" without them by your side! What tripe!
I know my words are inadequate, but they are deeply felt. Thank you.
Joy
"Now I understand what you tried to say to me. How you suffered for your sanity! How you tried to make them see. They did not listen they did not know how...Perhaps they'll listen now."
posted on September 24, 2000 08:34:07 AM new
I stumbled across this thread a little while ago. Even the thought of Jane Fonda being honored as anything more than "trash of the century" is revolting. I read this thread with amazement. One poster kept coming back again and again with rationalizations for Jane's actions. There are no rationalizations that are acceptable for her behavior.
As a former Army officer and the brother of a Viet Nam vet, I must say that ANY support of Hanoi Jane and her actions are simply disgusting. Honoring her with inclusion in a book such as the one described makes me want to puke!
My brother graduated from high school and reported to Basic Training the next week. Nine weeks later he stepped off the plane and walked into hell. He returned a different person, both physically and mentally. He earned three purple hearts and saw (literally) his two best friends die horrible deaths, as well as countless others. But he was one of the lucky ones. He returned.
After Viet Nam, he continued to serve his country until his old injuries forced an early retirement (he could no longer pass the physical). He retired as an E-8 and now works for a VA Hospital. What is amazing to me is that a large number of the "employees" at the hospital show an open disdain for the Viet Nam veterans. He repeatedly hears comments about "those damn veterans" and when he speaks out it becomes clear that his views are in the minority.
What they don't seem to realize is that "those damn veterans" are the reason that they have those cushy jobs in the first place, not to mention the freedom that we all enjoy as Americans.
I'm sure that some will say "If Nam was such hell, why did he stay in after the war ended?" He stayed in because he loves his country and enjoyed doing his part to keep it free. He hated the war, as most any vet surely did.
But there's more than just war involved. There is Duty, Honor, Country. Making supreme sacrifices so that all Americans and our allies can enjoy a life of freedom. And yes, so that the protesters can do so without the fear of the state crushing them and their ideas.
I believe that most Viet Nam vets had no hard feelings against the protesters who were against the war. In fact, many of those vets wished the protesters godspeed in their quest to put an end to hell. But when the curses and propoganda became directed toward the brave men and women who were charged with the task of fighting that war (and yes, the women "fought" just as hard as the men), there was something seriously wrong with the picture.
The photos of Hanoi Jane in North Viet Nam speak volumes, much more than the deplorable words that came from her putrid lips. She sould be ashamed to call herself an American. And so should anyone who attempts to come to her defense. All of this is IMHO...
posted on September 24, 2000 04:29:17 PM new
A few days later---have read all the posts.
I sincerely apologize to any I have offended with my words and thoughts.
Sometimes--when this sort of thread opens--I should just learn to keep my thoughts to myself.
If we were able to communicate real life--eyeball to eyeball--you might be able to understand what I am trying to communicate and I would be able to understand too better.
It's been a very hard thread.
I thank each and every one of you for your posts--it has made me think--and think hard about what I had written.
My heartfelt opinion was never to hurt anyone--just give an example of what many of us were feeling at the time.
Hellcat, Beth, I am sorry.
That's it. Jean
edited to add--you may ignore me--but I and my sentiments are not just singular. A wonderful forum is that which seeks opposing viewpoints and relishes the debate. It hurts all, scabs are opened--but let's hope that a learning process has begun--in my case--it has. There is always more answers than just your way---I don't care what the topic. Whatever--if my sincere apologies have not been adaquate----so be it.
[ edited by jeanyu on Sep 24, 2000 05:21 PM ]
posted on September 24, 2000 06:19:00 PM new
Jeanyu, you are so right! Diversity is one of the many things that make life interesting. I myself took no personal offense at what you said. I think the topic itself picked at the scabs. I welcome different opinions. After all, isn't that why we have chocolate, vanilla and strawberry?
posted on September 24, 2000 08:49:52 PM new
South Vietnam, I served 3 tours & yes it was a war.
A person's only freedom is thought. When those thoughts are expressed, they then become an action. Actions are accepted postive or negative.
What I have to say at this time will be accepted that way.
My last tour was as a platoon commander. My platoon received the Presidential unit citation. It brings thought.
Charlie's choice of weapons, were made in Russia.
Do we not have a protestor, who protest the war, while on a vist to Russia & who now sets in the White House?. Now that is some kind of reward and alot of forgiveness
posted on September 25, 2000 09:50:25 AM new
Sgt.Mike, 5x5. Had a tunnel rat that used that expression after a search. Wall to wall.
The size of tunnels were very important, as were many other things about them. I also read your meaning.
Upstaging was never my intent. Sure you were not a tunnel rat? HA!
posted on September 25, 2000 10:59:25 AM new
I just came across this post this morning and am very saddened by much of what I've read here. I was very active in the anti-war movement but also had friends and acquaintances who served in Vietnam. I am especially distressed at the brutal attacks on Jeanyu. To many of us at that time, the Vietnam War was an unjust, illegal, and immoral war and one of the most shameful periods of our history. That our country, the greatest, richest, more powerful nation in the world, would turn it's full destructive military power against a small impoverished third world land in the name of anti-communism. We used more munitions and bombs in this small corner of the world, than we did in the entire WW II , as well as enormous amounts of chemicals and defoliants that still poison the soil today. It's terrible that we lost 50,000 of our young men and women, but we should also remember that over one million Vietnamese also perished. That would translate to over five million Americans if we had suffered comparable causalities. None of this excuses the stupid and disgusting actions of Jane Fonda but trashing Jeanyu is wrong.
posted on September 25, 2000 11:24:40 AM newbut we should also remember that over one million Vietnamese also perished
I guess thats why they call it war
The men and women that served, suffered, and died, were told by our govt do what they had to do, so they should not have been sh*t on when they returned, which a lot of them were.
and now, and for quite awhile, we take in refugees from Vietnam.
I don't know what happened here with Jeanyu, I just wish this thread would end.
posted on September 25, 2000 11:38:49 AM newI guess thats why they call it war
In fact there was no declaration of War! It remains as a prime example of abuse of the power of the President over the powers of the congress. Only congress has the power to declare War but Johnson used an incident in the Gulf of Tonkin to send troops to Vietnam without calling it a War. I agree that the treatment of the returning troops was very wrong. As I remember there were examples of this behavior on both sides such as construction workers attacking anti-war protesters.
posted on September 25, 2000 11:38:57 AM newsavoyking
Being you were "very active in the anti-war (Vietnam) movement," you surely had all your facts in order and did not (just) participate on an emotional level. Therefore, you should be able to factually and in a nonbiased manner inform all readers why and how the USA became involved.
I doubt you mean that Kennedy (just) woke one morning and decided to start a war in Vietnam.
Regardless of how the politicians made a mess of things and created restrictive policies that caused thousands of needless deaths or how many bombs were dropped, tell us about how South Vietnam welcomed the North's invasion and the mass murdering of South Vietnamese citizens opposed to communism, or because a person was too educated.
posted on September 25, 2000 11:52:28 AM new
Your facts are pretty badly distorted, savooyking, 'cause the bulk of those killings were not done by Americans, but by Vietnamese. It was a civil war, after all.
Mikey, no questioning of a platoon commander who achieved that status on a third tour? Long time to stay a 2nd louie, as that's what a platoon {b]leader[/b] was, invariably. Course, it coulda' been some other army, I guess. Didn't strike you a little queer? Or what? You just don't know?
posted on September 25, 2000 12:01:44 PM new
Hey Sgt. Mike!
Nice to receive one of your usual smarmy replies. The 1954 Geneva peace accords ended the French Indochina War. Among it's provisions was the temporary division of Vietnam into a northern part administered by Ho Chi Minh and his followers and the southern part to be administered by The French and their Vietnamese allies. Each side was to regroup in their respective sectors. After a period of two years (I'm not sure of the exact period now), the country was to be re-unified with general elections. These accords were quite specific that this division was not permanent and the Vietnam was to be re-unified. Since the US was not a signatory to these accords, President Eisenhower, his secretary of State John Foster Dulles, and our client President Diem of Vietnam felt that since such an election would result in a communist victory that we should ignore these accords. This refusal to hold election was the prime cause of resumption of hostilities.
Make Love not War. Sorry, just had to use this again.
posted on September 25, 2000 12:20:15 PM new
Savoyking,
Your post above is accurate. Kennedy came into the mess and wanted free elections to have an equitable chance without the bloody persuasion used by the northern factions so advisors were sent to train Diem troops to fend for themselves. And off we went. The Tonkin incident, whether it really occured or not, was Johnson's leverage for the resolution which allowed him to initiate bombing in the north and to escalate troop strength in increments.
I'm not sure what Kennedy had in mind but I believe he started us on the bath of more and more involvement especially with the US participation in the coup against the Diem brothers. Although at the time many of us demonized Johnson, I am not sure really wanted this War. The Democratic presidents were very concerned in being perceived as anti-Communist stalwarts. The specter of a repeat of the recriminations of the 1950's over who lost China was always a concern for them. They didn't want to be blamed for losing Indochina. Also the loss of so many of our Asian experts in the State Department as a result of the purges of the 1950 over the loss of China had a profound effect on the advisors to our presidents. These advisors viewed the world from an European perspective not an Asian one.
posted on September 25, 2000 12:56:55 PM new
That's true, though I've come to believe that even Kennedy realized that it was a no-win for us and intended to withdraw. He'd started, by reducing the number of Ameican advisors in 1963, but we'll never know if he would have continued. At any rate, the thing was very nearly out of his control by then, and manuevering at the state de[artment level was apparently taking place without his knowledge, or at least it cannot be documented that he did have knowledge. The assasination of Diem probably took him by surprise and strengthened his resolve to get out of there.
The single best source on the develpment and continuation of American participation in the Vietnam war is Neil Sheehan's "A Bright Shining Lie". If you haven't read it, do. I've spent a lot of my life trying to make sense of the thing and that book stands by itself as a brilliant history of our entanglement there.
By the way, if you protested in CA in 1967 at the Oakland Army Induction Center, we probably passed each other by, and if you had any association with the Vietnam Veteran's Against the War in Cleveland, Philadelphia, or Washington D.C., we might have rubbed shoulders.
It was my impression that the Kennedy brothers were very much involved in that coup. Sorry, but we never crossed paths in Ca because I live in NY and was involved in the protests here nor was I involved with Vietnam Veteran's Against the War. I haven't read the Sheehan book but I certainly will do so. By the way I recommend the Haberstram book "The best and the Brightest". Please forgive me if I don't answer any posts for a while but I am off for some physical therapy for a rotator cuff problem and won't be near a computer till later tonight.
Just (now) saw your comment about "fred." I did not overlook his information. I considered he meant the previous two tours were in a capacity other than a platoon commander, or that he might have been given a "battlefield commission," or that he might have completed OCS.
At the present, his brief and simplistic overtures regarding VN tend to ring of validity. It is when someone constantly crawls to the rooftop and blows (their) horn do I become expeditiously suspicious. Or, when someone constantly expresses enviousness that someone, although they are not blowing it loudly, is holding a real and larger horn.
But, have no concern, I have a pocket full of change for $3.00 bills.
[ edited by sgtmike on Sep 25, 2000 02:30 PM ]
This topic is 7 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new7new
bill. 