Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:April:24 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2004/4/24-25 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Others] UID:13365 Activity:nil
4/23    Yeah, you counter-culture beatniks really emote the truth with
        these so-called pics of dead serviceman at
        I hope when YOU are dead, they showed pictures of YOUR CASKET.
        I am just glad it won't be blessed with an American flag.
        \_ Here you have before you a live Bush supporter.
           Don't get too close, they bite!
           \_ you're just saying that liberal crap because you don't really
              understand the policy.  this should clear it up:
                \_ despite the policy, i do wonder where all those corpses go
                \_ the *only* reason that these photos (or video) are not
                   released is so that public opinion does not turn against
                   any post-vietnam war. the gov't doesn't give a shit about
                   families feelings, let alone their health (e.g., agent
                   orange, gulf war syndrome, etc). Don't fool yourself into
                   always accepting the gov't line. "Trust no one". -Mulder
        \_ Talk to some of their families, who say they want the public to
           know how many are dying.
           \_ Look.  It's understandable that military families don't want to
              lose loved ones, but this is how war is.  I am sure _some_ of
              the military families dislike Bush and his policies, but so what?
              The public is fully aware of how many are dying, it's being
              trumpeted by CNN every single fucking day.  At any rate,
              50,000 >>> 700.
                \_ where do you get your 50k figure?  about 4 MILLION
                   died in the vietnam war.
                   \_ 50k combat US deaths, about 60k total US deaths around
                      Vietnam.  Did you notice that this thread was talking
                      about US casualties, not total casualties?
                   \_ Are you counting the *entire* Vietnam war which includes
                      the time the French were there and we weren't?  It was
                      roughly 2m Vietnamese dead during the time the US was
                      there.  40:1 is pretty god damned good.  This was a war
                      lost at home, not in the field.  If we "lose" in Iraq
                      it won't be because we lost on the ground.  As usual it
                      will be lost at home because of people like you.
                           \- Mr. D. Ass: wars are about achieving your
                              political objective, not maximizing your own to
                              enemy casualty rate. Rather than win/lose, ask
                              yourself what was the point of the US involvement
                              and then answer whether that goal was achieved
                              and eval whether it was "successful" on those
                              terms. While you are at it, you may want to
                              look up what city SGN is the airport code for.
                              "Let me speak honestly, frankly,  -Le Duc Tho to
                              openheartedly. You are a liar."    Super K
                              \_ Uhm...did you even read the post you're
                                 replying to?  I think you just reiterated his
                                 point, only with a bunch of lame ad hominem
                                 thrown in.
                              \_ Talk about missing the point.... After the
                                 Tet Offensive, the leftists in America forced
                                 us to finally leave, when in fact that very
                                 same assault was beaten back with minimal
                                 American losses and truly devastating losses
                                 to the enemy.  After the TO the enemy had no
                                 reserves or military strength.  The war was
                                 over.  We had won.  Except we didn't because
                                 it was lost at home.  We walked away after
                                 one of the biggest military victories in
                                 history and chalked up the whole thing as a
                                 military and political loss.  There was never
                                 a military loss.  The political loss was
                                 caused by people like the person I replied to
                                 above, at home.  --that poster above
                                 \- explaining why the war unfolded as it
                                    did or what were the side effects of the
                                    war whike interesting history is diff q
                                    than "was the war a success". if the war
                                    was conducted to prevent a communist
                                    victory, well that didnt happen, did it.
                                    you can say "enough was done to prevent
                                    the dominos from falling" but that also
                                    opens the response that "the domino
                                    theory as stated was wrong" since
                                    marginal changes in the balance of power
                                    didnt seem to be destabilizing. so you
                                    tell me first "what was the point of the
                                    american intervention in vietnam"? and
                                    then we'll talk about whether that was
                                    successful. Obviously the North `won' the
                                    Civil War in the sense that the union was
                                    preserved, slavery abolished, and ante-
                                    bellum souther culture and economics
                                    changed. However, the Union also had
                                    vastly higher wounded/killed. --psb
                                        \_ Good duck.  Back to the point: if we
                                           had stayed after the TO and not let
                                           ourselves be mislead by the left in
                                           this country, the North would have
                                           been beaten back and Vietnam would
                                           most likely be a mirror of what SK
                                           has become today.  Democratic,
                                           industrial, capitalist, generally
                                           successful.  We won Vietnam on the
                                           ground, but lost it at home.
                                        \_ S. Vietnam invaded, Cambodia
                                           invaded, Afghanistan invaded,
                                           Angola and Mozambique Communist
                                           revolutions, Nicarauga
                                           communist revolution
                                           ... seems to me the domino
                                           theory was right.  The Soviets
                                           realized they could not
                                           contest NATO in Europe so
                                           they pursued the third world.
                                           This is history of the
                                           Cold War 101.
                                           \- how did any of these affect
                                              US security? do you think the
                                              break down of sino-soviet
                                              harmony in the 1960, becoming
                                              smewhat open with the conflict
                                              on the ussuri river caused the
                                              a shift in the balance of
                                              power between E and W? If the
                                              "loss of china" didnt cause much
                                              security problems for the SU,
                                              dont you think it is odd to
                                              suggest angola, nic. cuba etc
                                              especially mattered in terms of
                                              the "big picture"? afganistan
                                              arguably was a bit of a change
                                              in doctrine. --psb
                                              \_ If you can't formulate
                                                 an explanation yourself
                                                 I don't think there's
                                                 much point in explaining
                                                 it. But Afghanistan
                                                 for example
                                                 offered a land bridge to
                                                 the middle east and
                                                 the goal was the
                                                 warm water ports of
                                                 Pakistan.  The outlook
                                                 was pretty bleak for
                                                 the US in the 1970s.
                                                 \- On vietnam see
                                        Leslie Gelb and Richard K Betts:
                                        The Irony of Vietnam and Bernard
                                        Brodie, War and Politics ... "many
                                        grave  ... decisions concerning 'nam
                                        were made on assumptions or premises
                                        which would not withstand any kind of
                                        logical scrutiny but were simply never
                                        challenged" ... e.g. domino theory.
                                        For similar on say Afganistan see
                                        Stephen Van Evera's ppr called
                                        something like "why states believe
                                        stupid things." Of course Waltz'79
                                        is an exceptional book. It has a
                                        reference: "as some saw early in the
                                        struggle, and as most saw later on,
                                        in terms of global politics little was
                                        at stake in vietnam (Steossinger'76,
                                        Chap 8, shows this was Kissinger's
                                        view)." --psb
                                        \_ Quoting a bunch of folks out of
                                           context doesn't add anything or
                                           make a point.  It does kind of turn
                                           me on though and makes you look
                                           very pseudo brainy.  Can I have your
                                           love child?
                      \_ Let me get this straight: with 30 years of
                         hindsight, you honestly believe that Vietnam was
                         a war worth fighting?  That we should have stuck
                         it out just to put yet another notch in the win
                         column?  I find that appalling, and I'd like to
                         know-- why?
                         \_ I am not the poster above, but whether Vietnam
                            was worth fighting depends on whether you believe
                            the containment strategy was a good idea.
                            It's a good question, and I am not sure I know
                            the answer.  Certainly rejecting Vietnam as a bad
                            idea just because a lot of people died seems wrong.
                              -- ilyas
                            \_ I am not the poster above.
                               While containment is arguably an ok idea,
                               Vietnam turned out to be a bad place to do
                               it.  American arrogance and racism alienating
                               the Vietnamese did not help.  Should've
                               recognized the mistake and futility earlier
                               and taken a step back and done the containment
                               at the border of Thailand.
                               \_ Your argument is different from the guy above
                                  you, he says: "Vietnam itself was a bad war",
                                  while you say something much weaker:
                                  "Vietnam execution had mistakes".  Certainly
                                  this is true.  I don't believe there was
                                  institutional racism in Vietnam, but I am
                                  not a student of that war (I find it to be
                                  kind of a boring war, in fact I find all
                                  American wars to be boring for some reason).
                                    -- ilyas
                                  \_ Sure, but execution is almost
                                     everything.  Your execution should not
                                     be contrary to your purpose for the war.
                                     Also, one has to ask if US's concern
                                     for the livelihood of the Vietnamese
                                     or just view it as a pawn in a global
                                     fight against communism.  Did US really
                                     cared if 1 million or 4 million
                                     vietnamese died?  At that point in
                                     time racism was still institutionalized
                                     in America itself, why do you not
                                     believe it's in Vietnam too?
                                        \_ 25 million Russians and
                                           10 million Germans died in
                                           WWII - was this also a racist
                                           war?  As with all Communist
                                           insurrections, the war is cast
                                           in terms national liberation
                                           by a cadre at the top.  Once
                                           the fighting has ended the
                                           common people and footsoldiers
                                           realize they have
                                           been duped and, if they are
                                           not subsequently assasinated,
                                           find themselves living as
                                           serfs in a totalitarian
                                           \_ Nazi belief in racial
                                        superiority certainly played
                                        a role in the decision to
                                        invade Russia.  I don't know
                                        what you mean by "racist war".
                                        I did not say that racism is
                                        the sole driver of the wars.
                        \_ Vietnam was conceptually similar to Korea - was
                           the Korean War a good idea?  Considering
                           S. Korea is the 11th largest economy in the world
                           I'd say so.  Vietnam was won.  South Vietnam
                           was free and democratic for two years until the
                           leftists in Congress that Kerry epitomized
                           decided to
                           withdrawl all military and financial support
                           to Saigon.  N. Vietnam, backed by the Soviets and
                           China, violated the Treaty of Paris and invaded
                           not only S. Vietnam but also Cambodia.
              \_ your arithmetic expressions holds true.  so at what point
                 are the deaths too much? 7000?
                 \_ One wonders if the US pulled out of Vietnam due to casualty
                    aversion or something else. -- ilyas
                        \_ Because of leftists in gov't and Congress.
              \_ Yeah, this is just like Vietnam.
        \_ Soldiers who die in the line of duty deserve to be honored, both
           in private ceremonies and in public.  There is no shame in dying
           for your country, nor is there shame in sending men and women to
           die for their country.  Either take pride in them and honor them
           publicly, or admit that you have not the courage of your
           convictions and you've asked them to die for a farce.
           \_ there is plenty of shame in sending men and women to die
              needlessly for their country.
              \_ Don't blame the soldier, blame the Commander(s) in Chief
                 \_ Starting with jimmie carter who proved to the islamic
                    fascists that terrorism can work again a super power.
                    \_ rofl, terrorism has always worked.  most rebellions
                        start out as "terrorism"
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:April:24 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>