what was differant about viet nam?

[whirlwind]

i was explaining some things to my daughters today, and they asked me how many of our soldiers were killed in viet nam. i explained around 50k. and i got to thinking about how that war turned the stomache of this country and changed how we felt about war . and i began to think,in viet nam we lost 50k in ten years...but in korea we lost over 50k in three years,and in the civil war we lost 50k in one battle! the major differance i see is the media and self serving politicians. its sad that it has scarred us so that we as a nation have began to be so gunshy about war that some are content to allow hollywood types to form public opinion by their liberal rantings. idunno...i just long for the times when we ALL got behind our country and supported "the good fight" thats how i always thought about viet nam. as the good fight. see i was in kindergarten when we pulled out of saigon and i would always sit home and watch the news with my parents and my parents would talk about how we were over there to help free the vietnamese people and then theyd talk about the casualties that day and we would pray for their souls and wish them all gods speed in getting the job done so they could come home.then dad would turn the tv off as soon as hed see some freak wearing beads and paisley and i wasnt exposed to the politics of that war until way after it was over. politics and media should play no part in any war. but it always will i fear.

[Rufus Rhastus J]

I can tell, by your choice of words and the general tone of your post you feel the same regrets and pain about all this as I do. The media, though possibly well meaning, has done quite well at exploiting the tone of the public. Many folks are just tooo busy or lazy to consider things on thier own. War is a terrible thing. People die and people are hurt. Many times, it's reallly hard to decide who is the real winner. i tend to consider both sides as losers. I regret to remind folks how close this war is begining to look and smell like VN all over again. I doubt if the American public has the stomache for more of the same. This is why I have continually urged we get busy and blast these vermin to hell as soon as we can. I worry, with the daily reports of ten here and five there...then, another three dead here, just how long it will be before the American public begins to see that ten dimes make a dollar! also, as the debt continues to climb past levels you and I can only guess at how many zeros it takes to amount to a zillion dollars, when will we reach a level we cannot continue with? Just something to think about.

[Rave]

When I was in the service I was in a group selected for an award.When the board got to me and asked"Why are we in VN",after careful consideration I gave them my answer of'!!!!ed if I know."
Well,that was the end of my interview,didn't get the award,but did get the first stripe that was givin at the base in 18 months,I guess politics wasn't everthing.
I tend to feel the same way now,I won't get any support from folks on this forum,but that's the way I see it,too bad.

[Rave]

Hummm,another reason why I say I don't know why we are in Iraq,I have heard many reasons coming out of the white house,as one falters another takes it's place,to the point that I don't know why we are there.
Now this morning on the front page of the paper there is a story of how the CIA had strong evidence that the WMD program had been abandoned years ago and didn't tell the President...maybe...now the are under a "scathing" investigation.
I still don't know,so many possibilities,so many stories,so much

I'm glad the press is more involved in our current situation. It sounded like you grew up in a family that only wanted to hear one side of the discussion. That's okay.
can you support our troops and still want the war in Iraq to end. Can you support our military but be opposed to it's current deployment? I think the answer is yes.

Politics and media have always played a part in war. They always will play a part too. This is a good thing, not a bad thing. I don't always like what I see or hear, and I don't always appreciate the bias (left or right) but I couldn't imagine not having access to the information.
Sounds like you would prefer China or Communist Russia for your media model.

[whirlwind]

actually my family is very much into listening to both sides. but we dont like to listen to a bunch of s@it either. im all for letting the press do their job! but only after the military's job is done. war IS hell and the terrors and foulness of war are used to further the left wings dribble and thats wrong in my opinion. like in ww 2,there were alot of nazis still fighting and carrying on a gorilla war after the german surrender. but what most people didnt see was the extreme punishment that was delt to them. gruesome ?...yes but their tactics stopped the gorilla attacks and saved many allied lives. but now a days when one crys havoc and lets loose the dogs of war it seems political correct press has effectively castrated the dogs of war.

I disagree with your basic point.
Allowing the American public access to the wars being fought in their name is a good thing. Not all the reports are bad and the "political correct" press has been doing a decent job. There is plenty of bias both ways and I think the truth is finding it's way to the surface.

You give the media far too much power than it really has.

It is common for politicians to say media isn't giving their side a fair shake. I find that to be a dodge and not always true. Rush Limbaugh has been fanning that flame for a long time and it really is the fallicy of Ad Hominem. Actually, he commits that fallicy a lot.

Here is a website dedicated to the different types of fallacies which I find helpful and interesting. I don't want to appear like a snoot. Some might say the damage is already done.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...dex.html#index

I enjoy the website www.factcheck.org because of it's nonpartisan examination of the current political ads for president.

[Lord Shrike]

Letting the press have open access to War is a terrible mistake. It puts our soilders at risks and allows the enemy to use our own media to sap the moral of the country. Alquada's tactics are a perfect example of this. They conduct attacks and killings not geared for the maxium tactical damage but for the greatest visual and psycological damage. Additionally giving the borderline seditious behavior of several major news org ever since the veitnam conflict allowing reporters to be in the thick of things is allways going to be a hinderance to the military. Press has forfeited its right to coverage of these events.

The media does not have open access to the field.
What is interesting is the far left feels the same way about the media as the far right. Their reasons for not trusting the media stem from them being owned by large corporations.

[whirlwind]

you are right,in this day and time where joe blow can send video images across the world in a matter of seconds,the media is in all wars too stay. but i just think that having so much access to the media just plays right into the hands of our enemies.

[TheTeXasSoldier]

We are in Iraq, because we asked if they had Nukes and they didn't awnser, we asked agian and they didn't awnser, and are beloved president Bush expects to be awnsered because he dosen't take Sh** off nobody.

I hate the media nowdays, they should all be whiped out and replaced with people that don't exagerate and lie, back in Veitnam thousands died each day, know only afew are killed each day and the freaking press is acting like its the end of the freakin world!

:uzi: :insane:

[whirlwind]

amen!

[8Super Soldier8]

Amen, I second that opinion!

I don't get the same feeling from the reporting you do. When someone is killed, they report it. I don't sense a over dramatization of that fact but I must confess that I don't really watch the news. I read it off the internet.
The google news page is actually pretty good because it auto-generates every fifteen minutes. So, you get a pretty good section of reporting of the days events.

Enjoy.

[Rufus Rhastus J]

They don't call it the liberal press for nothing...

Actually Conservatives call it the "liberal press" when the news isn't going their way. They call it good journalism when the opposite is true.

Remember when Clinton was in office and all of a sudden the media was part of the "Right-wing Conspiracy"?

We live in a country with a free press. Aside from some basic guidelines (libel and so forth) journalists are able to find information and report it. That is an amazing thing to have in our country. Most countries do not have this. We take it for granted.

Journalists have shed light on some of the more important things in our lives and sparked change in almost every facet. One example which comes to mind is Watergate.

I'm not saying you have to include the press in your morning prayers everyday but, be thankful we have the press we do.

[whirlwind]

im not saying to cut the press out all together, im just saying that there full coverage should be done after the war is done. who does it serve to report all the dirty parts of a war while we still have troops in harms way? the only people i can see it serves is our enemies. the press should be totally briefed on an after action report when the job is completely done. then let them have their scandals and all there abrasive and insighting stories. then we can start investigations into the problems.

The problem is if the military had it's way, the press would get nothing. There would be no scandals or exciting stories besides "US Soldier goes down fighting!" or whatever.
The press cannot give away troop positions or numbers since that would be helping the enemy.
I have not seen an instance where the press has been the cause for increased troop deaths or troubles.
Remember, the government can control information. The press can shed light where the govt. does not want you to see. Without a free press, WACO or Ruby Ridge would only have one side to the story. There would be no other outlet for the information besides rumor.

That is the problem in the middle east and Iraq. They have never had a free press so it is natural for them to disbelieve anything told them. According to the Iraqi on the street, we got the wrong Saddam.

I do agree some of the press can do more harm than good at times. It is a business and sometimes telling the truth gets clouded by needing to build viewers or readers.

The current model has its flaws, but the benefits outwiegh them.

[TheTeXasSoldier]

I can't stand turning on the news, and seeing some news guy dressed up in a military uniform at an american base trying to act like he's in this terrible danger. Mr. Kaneko you need to watch out, to much news can brainwash people knowdays, next month you might come on here talking about armagedon coming LOL J/K.

[Shaun]

K the press is completely owned by the liberals its a known fact have to read Ernie Goldberg's book BIAS or Ann Coulters "Slander"

Our Military would be so much better off if they controlled all news coming out of any theatre. First off they would not have these foolish reporters in the way or even giving away locations. Second they would not have the extra distractions brought into the theatre by these fools that feel we need to know everything back in the states.