Iraq: Learning The Lessons Of Vietnam - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-30-2005, 03:00 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


and a civil war in Viet Nam was the same threat as Hitler and the same threat as the Japanese that had bombed Pearl Harbor?


if you are going to use the WWII comparisons we had no business in VN or in Iraq today.
Saddam threatened the planets energy supply in a way Hitler was never able to and had weapons and development programs that Hitler never had.

The communist incursion into Vietnam was indeed a threat although not to the degree that Saddam and Hitler were. . South Vietnam had every right to be a free independent state just as much as South Korea. Most Vietnam veterans agree that the war was indeed just.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:02 PM   #32
The Fly
 
japes4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Big Lemon (New York)
Posts: 78
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


and a civil war in Viet Nam was the same threat as Hitler and the same threat as the Japanese that had bombed Pearl Harbor?


if you are going to use the WWII comparisons we had no business in VN or in Iraq today.
This is an excellent point...which leads me to my next question: Was the threat of communism and the current threat of Islamic fundamentalism on the same level of danger as that of fascism?

By one's opposition to Vietnam War and the current Iraq War, that answer must be no.

How then can one justify a war against fascism and not ones against communism and Islamic fundamentalism? All three threaten(ed) the existence of Western freedom and democracy.
__________________

__________________
japes4 is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:06 PM   #33
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:09 AM
more of

deny, deny, deny?





Quote:
Mini Nukes

Reporter: Graham Phillips Researcher: Paul Grocott

Transcript
Related Info
20 May 2004
A new generation of nuclear weapons – mini nukes is being planned by America. According to the US military, they need miniature nukes in the war against terrorism So they’re designing bunker busting weapons that can burrow down into the earth carrying a mini- nuke which would wipe out some rogue dictator’s control centre or destroy stores of chemical and biological weapons. And the military says, because these mini-nuke bunker busters will go off underground, the nuclear fall out from them will never escape. But the mini nukes have a lot of critics amongst them physicist Richard Slakey who says they won’t be able to burrow deep enough and more worryingly that the radiation fallout cannot be contained.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:06 PM   #34
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 52
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
If the United States had fought World War II with the same restraints that it had in Vietnam and now has in Iraq, it never would have won.

FatBrachney, at no point have I ever insulted you. Please give others the same courtesy. [/B]
WW2:The combined Allied AND Axis forces dropped over 2.5 million tonnes of high explosives in the COMBINED theatres of war in Europe/Asia/South Pacific.

Vietnam:MORE the DOUBLE the above figure is dropped on a small-illequipped 3rd world nation in South East Asia.


What "restraints" are you talking about?
4 Million Vietnamese WERE KILLED.
That is 3 million off from the Jewish Holocaust.
WHAT "restraints" are you talking about?


It is so very diffucult to hold back and NOT say something REALLY MEAN.
Especially -knowing how unmolested these common neo-con delusions go on almost every message board I've been to.
MORE public space filled with neo-con lies and revisions.
__________________
FatBratchney is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:09 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
more of

deny, deny, deny?





Yep, a love how the article states they were need for the war in Afghanistan or Iraq. To hell with the facts. The United States should have such weapons, but that does not mean they are going to be used on some mass scale if at all.

Yep, more accusations and assumptions.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:11 PM   #36
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:09 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


Saddam threatened the planets energy supply
you let a little truth in

it is "Blood for Oil" Haliburton and Cheney thank you and the President says "There will be more sacrifice to horor the dead and huge tax cuts to the oil companies while they are having RECORD profits"

yes BLOOD (more sacrifice) for OIL.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:11 PM   #37
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 52
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
How then can one justify a war against fascism and not ones against communism and Islamic fundamentalism? All three threaten(ed) the existence of Western freedom and democracy. [/B]
You NEED to be capable of distiguishing between a neo-con fantasy and basic political reality.

Don't expect half-intelligent peeps to entertain these neo-con myths.
__________________
FatBratchney is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:14 PM   #38
The Fly
 
japes4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Big Lemon (New York)
Posts: 78
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by FatBratchney


You NEED to be capable of distiguishing between a neo-con fantasy and basic political reality.

Don't expect half-intelligent peeps to entertain these neo-con myths.
Where am I wrong?
__________________
japes4 is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:17 PM   #39
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:09 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by japes4


This is an excellent point...which leads me to my next question: Was the threat of communism and the current threat of Islamic fundamentalism on the same level of danger as that of fascism?

America WOULD not fight to stop fascism.
The good old boys, in America First would not allow the "Intervenetalists" to join the 'European War".

FDR told Jewish Leaders that if I ask Americans to die for Jews in Europe the War effort will be set back even further.


It took an attack on America to get the US in the War.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:23 PM   #40
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by FatBratchney


WW2:The combined Allied AND Axis forces dropped over 2.5 million tonnes of high explosives in the COMBINED theatres of war in Europe/Asia/South Pacific.

Vietnam:MORE the DOUBLE the above figure is dropped on a small-illequipped 3rd world nation in South East Asia.


What "restraints" are you talking about?
4 Million Vietnamese WERE KILLED.
That is 3 million off from the Jewish Holocaust.
WHAT "restraints" are you talking about?


It is so very diffucult to hold back and NOT say something REALLY MEAN.
Especially -knowing how unmolested these common neo-con delusions go on almost every message board I've been to.
MORE public space filled with neo-con lies and revisions.
Once again the tonnes of bombs dropped vs. World War II is irrelevant, although it is interesting to note that over 50 million people died in World War II compared to only 4 million in Vietnam despite the fact that more than twice as many bombs were dropped in Vietnam. With your analogy, everyone in Vietnam should have been dead after the first two years of fighting.

The restraints that the United States was under during the war:

1. The United States military was not allowed to bomb within 100 miles of the Chinese border for most of the war.

2. Much of Hanoi and the area within 30 miles of Hanoi was often off limits for bombing by the United States military.

3. Most of North Vietnam's Harbors were often off limits to bombing or mining for most of the war by the United States military.

4. The United States military was restricted in bombing certain area's of Laos that the North Vietnamese used.

5. The United States military was restricted in launching any sort of ground invasion of North Vietnam.

6. The United States military was also restricted in launching any sort of MAJOR ground invasion of Cambodia and Laos for most of the war until the 1970s. Cambodia and Laos were extensively used by the North Vietnamese and Vietcong to launch brutal attacks on South Vietnam.

7. The United States military was not allow to bomb any area or near any area that may of had Soviet military advisors or Chinese military advisors in North Vietnam.

4 million Vietnamese died, but that includes South Vietnamese military personal, North Vietnamese personal, Vietcong, South Vietnamese civilians murdered by Vietcong and North Vietnamese forces, and yes, cases where US military firepower did cause civilian deaths, the vast majority which were not intential. If it had been the United States goal to cause mass death, the United States could have killed everyone in North Vietnam in a matter of months with nuclear weapons and other bombing measures.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:31 PM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


you let a little truth in

it is "Blood for Oil" Haliburton and Cheney thank you and the President says "There will be more sacrifice to horor the dead and huge tax cuts to the oil companies while they are having RECORD profits"

yes BLOOD (more sacrifice) for OIL.
The planets economy and way of life is dependent upon energy supplies from the Persian Gulf. If Persian Gulf energy supply were to be disrupted or sabotaged for any reason, the cost of energy would sky rocket causing a global depression far worse than the 1930s with incaculable consequences for the future. The people who feel the effects of such a disaster the most would be the worlds poor who would immediately be unable to afford the new energy prices. Complete shortages in many area's would happen rather quickly. As the global supply of energy is suddenly and drastically cut, the demand for what remains goes up by the same margin, resulting in a massive increase in prices and a total economic disaster.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:36 PM   #42
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:09 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by FatBratchney


Don't expect half-intelligent peeps to entertain these neo-con myths.
You are quite insulting to others.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:38 PM   #43
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 52
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Most of the US Military's activities were concentrated INSIDE S.Vietnam.

Most Vietnamese casualities were INSIDE SOUTH VIETNAM.

That fact that 50 million died WORLDWIDE died in WW2 and "only" 4 Million died in Vietnam does NOT serve your neo-con rhetoric well at all.

Thats a LOT of people to be killed by a VASTLY MORE WELL equipped US Military.

Some would call it a Holocaust.
__________________
FatBratchney is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 04:01 PM   #44
The Fly
 
japes4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Big Lemon (New York)
Posts: 78
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by FatBratchney
Most of the US Military's activities were concentrated INSIDE S.Vietnam.

Most Vietnamese casualities were INSIDE SOUTH VIETNAM.

That fact that 50 million died WORLDWIDE died in WW2 and "only" 4 Million died in Vietnam does NOT serve your neo-con rhetoric well at all.

Thats a LOT of people to be killed by a VASTLY MORE WELL equipped US Military.

Some would call it a Holocaust.
Some people would call the Allied bombings of Dresden and Tokyo (McNamara I believe) to be holocausts.

Sometimes that is the nature of war, and the reason why it is so important that wars are justified.
__________________
japes4 is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 04:05 PM   #45
The Fly
 
japes4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Big Lemon (New York)
Posts: 78
Local Time: 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


America WOULD not fight to stop fascism.
The good old boys, in America First would not allow the "Intervenetalists" to join the 'European War".

FDR told Jewish Leaders that if I ask Americans to die for Jews in Europe the War effort will be set back even further.


It took an attack on America to get the US in the War.
This is true, but was the American entry in WWII justified in a way that the Cold War and the War on Terror are not?
__________________

__________________
japes4 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com