My 2 Cents - Page 3

Butt Plug · #13 (**permalink**) 09-05-2008, 10:54 AM

Think as you will about Vietnam but the Politicians began to listen to what there constituency demanded. And thats why the War ended as it did. And thats why it still does not rage on today. And thats why John McCain is home, a US Senator running for President.

pcuthbert · #14 (**permalink**) 09-05-2008, 10:58 AM

Dave;

Take a look in your Funk and Wagnals. Learn what the different political regimes are. Socialism is not "Communism". Nor is the type of government that was practised in the former USSR.

If you need to use a word that starts with "C" to interpret Socialism, then try "Communalism".

Socialism does not need "money" to survive. It need not be practised by more than a family. It depends upon the interest and caring of each of its' members.

To read your words, Dave, suggest that you would be quite happy to take what you wanted from society and your neighbours and give back nothing. It suggests that you think only about what is good for Dave and forget about the rest.

What would have happened if your Mother and Father had had that attitude? "Don't send Dave to school, I need him to water the garden, and when he is finished that, he can do whatever else there is to do." "I don't care how cold it is outside, he don't need no shirt."

What about your children? Do you treat them this way? or do you provide them with the things they need, including the ability to provide for their children?

That, Dave, is socialism in action.

We all have different abilities to provide. We all have different needs. By combining these abilities and needs, we are all served.

If this is Satanic, then send me a set of horns and a pitchfork.

bubba74 · #15 (**permalink**) 09-05-2008, 10:58 AM

S. Vietnam did not have to fall. The Dems in congress, made it fall. The pulled te support and aid. Our troops where out already. The Dems hung them out to dry. Its not my opinion, it is an historical fact.

Toby · #16 (**permalink**) 09-05-2008, 11:16 AM

The Dem's of the time not only realized that freedom is not free they made the hard decisions to send millions of men into harms way , they let the commanders with the knowledge and experiences make the crucial decisions on the field of battle. As they did June 6th 1944 when Ike sent men into Europe to liberate it from the Nazis. Now we like to throw the 4000 death figure around a lot and any death is tragic but in that day in June so long ago we lost over 5000 on one beach alone in a 7hr period.

Then Dems believed in the American fortitude and perseverance to accomplish whatever it took so that others could have freedoms. The Dem party of today is nowhere near the party then , it has been taken over by the far, far left.

Butt Plug · #17 (**permalink**) 09-05-2008, 11:25 AM

The funds were cut because it was a forgone conclusion. The US Troops in Vietnam knew you could not count on the South Vietnamease Military. (not to mention the White House & Pentagon) They had conflicting interests and were serving not because they wanted to defend the regime but because they had to. They often just left the battle field. (does that remind you of Iraq?)Thats why it collapsed so fast even as the US was extracating its last people. Remember the Embassy and the Helicopter scenes and the Airport. Very sad but thats what happens when the wrong policys start a war. People suffer, like I said we would still be fighting that war if the citizens here did not say enough!
If you were in diapers at the time you missed the mood of the population at the period.
Believe me we were all sad to see the fall and the people who choose to stay by our side.
But that dosn't mean staying would be a better choice. More then 58 thousand of our people killed and some 3 million people of the region. How many more would please you?

bubba74 · #18 (**permalink**) 09-05-2008, 11:50 AM

Foreign Affairs - Iraq: Learning the Lessons of Vietnam - Melvin R. Laird

Quote:

The truth about Vietnam that revisionist historians conveniently forget is that the United States had not lost when we withdrew in 1973. In fact, we grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory two years later when Congress cut off the funding for South Vietnam that had allowed it to continue to fight on its own. Over the four years of Nixon's first term, I had cautiously engineered the withdrawal of the majority of our forces while building up South Vietnam's ability to defend itself. My colleague and friend Henry Kissinger, meanwhile, had negotiated a viable agreement between North and South Vietnam, which was signed in January 1973. It allowed for the United States to withdraw completely its few remaining troops and for the United States and the Soviet Union to continue funding their respective allies in the war at a specified level. Each superpower was permitted to pay for replacement arms and equipment. Documents released from North Vietnamese historical files in recent years have proved that the Soviets violated the treaty from the moment the ink was dry, continuing to send more than $1 billion a year to Hanoi. The United States barely stuck to the allowed amount of military aid for two years, and that was a mere fraction of the Soviet contribution.

Yet during those two years, South Vietnam held its own courageously and respectably against a better-bankrolled enemy. Peace talks continued between the North and the South until the day in 1975 when Congress cut off U.S. funding. The Communists walked out of the talks and never returned. Without U.S. funding, South Vietnam was quickly overrun. We saved a mere $297 million a year and in the process doomed South Vietnam, which had been ably fighting the war without our troops since 1973.

Truth is, the Dems in congress stabbed S. Vietnam in the back, the same way they wanted to stab Iraq in the back, and if given the chance, the Dems will still stab Iraq in the back.