5 Lies About the Vietnam War You Probably Believe (1 Viewer)

[Optimus Prime]

From Cracked - mild language

5 Lies About the Vietnam War You Probably Believe | Cracked.com

 

[bigdaddysaints]

anti-war protesters/hippies were waiting at airports to spit on veterans returning from combat

Seriously, you're telling us that a man who's been trained to take out Charlie with his bare hands, and who's just spent hours in a cramped airplane seat, is going to allow some acne-riddled teenager in John Lennon specs to hock one on him without repercussions? Even if the spitting itself didn't make the news, surely a returning soldier snapping a hippie over his knee like a brittle twig would have.

Never thought about it like that..

 

[saintcool13]

I was told the spitting did happen by an actual vet.

 

[superchuck500]

The one about the immolation of the monk is interesting - I never thought people just presumed he was protesting the war. I thought it was well known that he was protesting the very regime that we were propping up. It was a sign that was ignored by our policy makers that the South's house was not in order and that many despised the regime and its feudal, dictatorial policies. That, of course, didn't fit into the US narrative of defending a free people against the communist invader.

But the burning monk was one of those reality moments that should smack you in the face but many fail to recognize what it really means.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

The one about the immolation of the monk is interesting - I never thought people just presumed he was protesting the war. I thought it was well known that he was protesting the very regime that we were propping up. It was a sign that was ignored by our policy makers that the South's house was not in order and that many despised the regime and its feudal, dictatorial policies. That, of course, didn't fit into the US narrative of defending a free people against the communist invader.

But the burning monk was one of those reality moments that should smack you in the face but many fail to recognize what it really means.

And I wonder how many same/similar people complain that we don't go rushing into Syria

 

[sbadeaux]

Yes

I was told the spitting did happen by an actual vet.

My dad is a Vietnam vet. He said one of his friends were spit on at the airport and he saw it himself. They were heckled and called baby killers. So I can either trust my hero DAD or a crack pot liberal writer?

 

[boutte]

Maybe the spitting thing did happen but I never saw or heard of anything like that happening here. I did see lots of salutes, hand shakes and lunch tabs picked up though. And all those horrible hippies were more likely to give them a hug because it was their brother, cousin or high school buddy wearing that uniform.

(And those guys brought back the best pot most of us had ever seen.)

 

[superchuck500]

My dad is a Vietnam vet. He said one of his friends were spit on at the airport and he saw it himself. They were heckled and called baby killers. So I can either trust my hero DAD or a crack pot liberal writer?

Yeah, if the writer's conclusion is simply based on the the presumption that a soldier would not have tolerated it - that's probably flawed analysis. If vets say they experienced or witnessed it, that's who we believe.

I don't think it's irrational to think that a soldier returning from a combat tour in the 60s would be so quick to assault a civilian. You're talking about someone coming from a disciplined environment (where an arrest could be a serious problem) and at a time when we weren't so quick to start physical fights at any provocation like people are these days.

I think it's entirely sensible that the soldier would not fight the protester . . . as despicable as the person was in spitting.

 

[boutte]

My dad is a Vietnam vet. He said one of his friends were spit on at the airport and he saw it himself. They were heckled and called baby killers. So I can either trust my hero DAD or a crack pot liberal writer?

Yeah, if you use Cracked.com as an historical reference you need to re-think.

Where was your dad when this happened?

 

[sbadeaux]

Yea

Yeah, if the writer's conclusion is simply based on the the presumption that a soldier would not have tolerated it - that's probably flawed analysis. If vets say they experienced or witnessed it, that's who we believe.

I don't think it's irrational to think that a soldier returning from a combat tour in the 60s would be so quick to assault a civilian. You're talking about someone coming from a disciplined environment (where an arrest could be a serious problem) and at a time when we weren't so quick to start physical fights at any provocation like people are these days.

I think it's entirely sensible that the soldier would not fight the protester . . . as despicable as the person was in spitting.

Well said super chuck. My dad outside of war would not hurt a fly. One of the most loving men you could ever meet. He and is friends understood why people were protesting. He and most of his troop were not for war. They did not believe we should be there, but they went. Thier country told them too. These are the children of WW2 vets. If your country asks, you go.

 

[superchuck500]

Well said super chuck. My dad outside of war would not hurt a fly. One of the most loving men you could ever meet. He and is friends understood why people were protesting. He and most of his troop were not for war. They did not believe we should be there, but they went. Thier country told them too. These are the children of WW2 vets. If your country asks, you go.

Yep - same with my father in law. He spent a year in Walter Reed after his wrist and hand were shot to pieces. He had almost the opposite happen though, he was leaving a restaurant and some pseudo-tough guy called him a 'hippie ***' - not knowing that he was talking to a combat-wounded Marine (at that point he had long hair and a beard). But he just kept walking, didn't want to gratify that jerk by responding.

 

[sbadeaux]

Now

The generations growing up now no little about Sacrifice. The WW2 generation knew about sacrifice. The current 20 year olds come from parents who were never at war. With a few exceptions ( Samalia, Afganastan Ect). The numbers going to War are just smaller. The fatalities are much smaller. The sacrifice at home is much smaller. For some who lost family in a current conflict it's not, but I am talking about society as a whole.

It makes me wonder if we were attacked today, a modern day Pearl Harbor.
An attack by a Nation State. Would we react like we did in WW2. Would young Americans rush to join the armed forces? Would the current society feel the need to defend our nation? I saw some of that with 911, but an attack by a Nation State with an actual military would be different. How do you think we would react?

 

[Blk&Gold4Life]

My dad's buddy who was a vet was pushing one of his friends who got paralyzed in the war down the street one day. A protester walked up and grabbed the guy in the wheelchair and spit in his face. Needless to say my dad's buddy left the protester with a broken arm and a few teeth missing.

 

[sbadeaux]

Wow

My dad's buddy who was a vet was pushing one of his friends who got paralyzed in the war down the street one day. A protester walked up and grabbed the guy in the wheelchair and spit in his face. Needless to say my dad's buddy left the protester with a broken arm and a few teeth missing.

Not for violence, but I can see why. My dad is as non violent as it gets, but if he saw his disabled vet buddy get spat on, he would probably do the same thing.

 

[Blk&Gold4Life]

Not for violence, but I can see why. My dad is as non violent as it gets, but if he saw his disabled vet buddy get spat on, he would probably do the same thing.

He's actually a very nice, mild mannered guy. I've told him I felt he let the guy off easy.