Ukulady wrote:You measure the success of a war by how many major engagements were won. I measure the failure of a war by how many lives were lost. I was not referring to the capability of our military, I was referring to the continuing plight of the our leaders trying to force their beliefs on the rest of the world. You're blaming the media for pulling out of the war? Perhaps 58,000 dead American soldiers and a couple million college students had a little to do with it.
By your rationale then there is never a cause for war. I am glad that Lincoln, Roosevelt, Truman and eventually Wilson had a better understanding of history and the cost of freedom then you do. The civil war saw 58,000 dead in a single battle, there were riots in New York and loud vocal protests against the war. Wilson was elected on a pacifist ticket and that allowed for a long time the butchery in France to continue. Eventually he came to understand what the population, congress and the military already knew. That our freedom was at stake in Flanders, and Verdun, and the eastern front. Roosevelt had to fight daily with pacifist "peace in our time" parties in congress and the population, but he also understood what was at stake on the battlefields of Europe and on the islands of the pacific. D-Day saw in one day 1/7th of the casualties in the Vietname war. And Truman understood that ruthless strategy leads to fewer battles and fewer lives lost. And judged that the 10's of thousands killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki actually saved more lives in the end by stopping the war and eliminating the need for an invasion of the Japanese home islands.
You may not like these facts from our past, but they are facts nonetheless. There are times when war is necessary, and it requires good judgement at the moment of decision, not hindsight looking back.
Ukulady wrote:You measure the success of a war by how many major engagements were won. I measure the failure of a war by how many lives were lost. I was not referring to the capability of our military, I was referring to the continuing plight of the our leaders trying to force their beliefs on the rest of the world. You're blaming the media for pulling out of the war? Perhaps 58,000 dead American soldiers and a couple million college students had a little to do with it.
You say I blame the media for the withdrawal. Well when the military is succeeding on the battlefields and the president orders a withdrawal who is to blame? Perhaps you never read what happened to the South Vietnamese who supported the US after we left, or perhaps never heard of the killing fields in Cambodia. Why did that occur? Read the history and study the cause and effects. You trumpet the millions of college students who wanted to pull out. I lay the slaughter of our Vietnamese allies at their feet.
Ukulady wrote:You measure the success of a war by how many major engagements were won. I measure the failure of a war by how many lives were lost. I was not referring to the capability of our military, I was referring to the continuing plight of the our leaders trying to force their beliefs on the rest of the world. You're blaming the media for pulling out of the war? Perhaps 58,000 dead American soldiers and a couple million college students had a little to do with it.
By your rationale then there is never a cause for war. I am glad that Lincoln, Roosevelt, Truman and eventually Wilson had a better understanding of history and the cost of freedom then you do. The civil war saw 58,000 dead in a single battle, there were riots in New York and loud vocal protests against the war. Wilson was elected on a pacifist ticket and that allowed for a long time the butchery in France to continue. Eventually he came to understand what the population, congress and the military already knew. That our freedom was at stake in Flanders, and Verdun, and the eastern front. Roosevelt had to fight daily with pacifist "peace in our time" parties in congress and the population, but he also understood what was at stake on the battlefields of Europe and on the islands of the pacific. D-Day saw in one day 1/7th of the casualties in the Vietname war. And Truman understood that ruthless strategy leads to fewer battles and fewer lives lost. And judged that the 10's of thousands killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki actually saved more lives in the end by stopping the war and eliminating the need for an invasion of the Japanese home islands.
You may not like these facts from our past, but they are facts nonetheless. There are times when war is necessary, and it requires good judgement at the moment of decision, not hindsight looking back.
You don't seem to get beyond my first sentence in each of my post without telling me I need to "study the vietnam war" or give me a rant about the history of our past wars. My point regarding Vietnam and Iraq is our leaders in both wars are trying to change the beliefs of an already established country. Go in, help who needs to be helped, but quit trying to make Christians out of the Muslims for the sake of oil. It won't work.
Ukulady wrote:You don't seem to get beyond my first sentence in each of my post without telling me I need to "study the vietnam war" or give me a rant about the history of our past wars. My point regarding Vietnam and Iraq is our leaders in both wars are trying to change the beliefs of an already established country. Go in, help who needs to be helped, but quit trying to make Christians out of the Muslims for the sake of oil. It won't work.
You are not consistent in your arguments. No war, but go in and help. How exactly should we go in and help without committing the miliatry?
Who is trying to create Christians out of Muslims? The is simply an idiotic statement. Maybe you should speak to some soldiers before claiming that they are trying to do this.
Ukulady wrote:You don't seem to get beyond my first sentence in each of my post without telling me I need to "study the vietnam war" or give me a rant about the history of our past wars. My point regarding Vietnam and Iraq is our leaders in both wars are trying to change the beliefs of an already established country. Go in, help who needs to be helped, but quit trying to make Christians out of the Muslims for the sake of oil. It won't work.
You are not consistent in your arguments. No war, but go in and help. How exactly should we go in and help without committing the miliatry?
Who is trying to create Christians out of Muslims? The is simply an idiotic statement. Maybe you should speak to some soldiers before claiming that they are trying to do this.
I never said "no war", I never said "soldiers" were trying to change Muslims in to Christians. And at this point I shall step aside, because you are not conversing about the subject but arguing about what I said and the conversation is not progressing.
As a wise and politically incorrect person one said;
Arguing on the internet is like playing in the Special Olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded.
Ukulady wrote:Just like that other war worked 30 years ago too? That was neither effective or capable in the end either......
I suggest you study some military history of the Vietnam war. The US did not lose a single major engagement in the entire war. To include Tet. Yet the media convinced the populace that we couldn't win, so the government pulled out. Not a military failure, but a failure of the will of the populace.
Bingo. I would add that the will of the populace failed largely because of the influence of the media. Now, the media has been trying to do the same thing in Iraq - fortunately, the mainstream (left wing) media no longer has a captive audience.
Well said, Green 1.
I have heard this said many times in the last thirty years. "The U.S. did not lose a single major engagement in the entire [Vietnam] war".
But it is self-evident that the U.S. failed to achieve its stated objectives in Vietnam. These objectives were no closer to being achieved when U.S. forces finally withdrew under Richard Nixon, leaving behind them a countryside and a people devastated by decades of war. Under any standard you wish to use for judging 'winning' and 'losing' in armed conflict, we clearly 'lost' the Vietnam war.
This failure is frequently blamed on the media at the time. But I think the media simply reported on the war and folks made up their own minds. It didn't help that large numbers of soldiers were coming home to their families in coffins month after month. Public opinion eventually turned against the war, but blaming the media for this is simplistic at best, akin to 'shooting the messenger'.
The failure in Vietnam is also frequently blamed on overly restrictive rules of engagement, likened to the U.S. fighting with 'one arm tied behind its back'. This assessment doesn't coincide with the facts. The U.S. pursued a 'free fire zone' policy in many parts of the country. The infamous Phoenix program serves as an example of how the civilian population of South Vietnam was terrorized and disenfranchised in order to 'save' them. The U.S. bombing campaigns dropped a staggering amount of ordnance during the years of the conflict - long before so-called 'smart bombs' existed - creating large numbers of civilian casualties (what we now euphemistically call 'collateral damage').
I don't know what people mean when they refer to these overly restrictive rules of engagement. Perhaps what they mean (something referred to in another thread in regard to this nation's military prowess) is that the nuclear option should have been used. People who think like this are a menace to civilization on this planet.
U.S. involvement in Vietnam was a mistake and not only in hindsight, but before we even sent 'advisors'. We had no business being there. We had no noble purpose there.
Our subsequent military action over there was a failure for a variety of reasons, but I don't think I'd place the blame on some purported 'left wing media cabal'.
Ukulady wrote:Just like that other war worked 30 years ago too? That was neither effective or capable in the end either......
I suggest you study some military history of the Vietnam war. The US did not lose a single major engagement in the entire war. To include Tet. Yet the media convinced the populace that we couldn't win, so the government pulled out. Not a military failure, but a failure of the will of the populace.
Bingo. I would add that the will of the populace failed largely because of the influence of the media. Now, the media has been trying to do the same thing in Iraq - fortunately, the mainstream (left wing) media no longer has a captive audience.
Well said, Green 1.
I have heard this said many times in the last thirty years. "The U.S. did not lose a single major engagement in the entire [Vietnam] war".
~snip~
Our subsequent military action over there was a failure for a variety of reasons, but I don't think I'd place the blame on some purported 'left wing media cabal'.
No?
Remember Walter Cronkite "reporting" after the Tet Offensive?
"and it would also require our realization, that we should have had all along, that any negotiations must be that-negotiations, not the dictation of peace terms. "
and
"But it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could."
That wasn't "just the facts." And back then, there weren't many other sources of news available, so Walter's words went largely unchallenged.
Bottom line is that, yes, as a matter of fact, the liberal press DID contribute mightily to our loss in Vietnam.
"How old would you be if you didn't know how old you are?" ~ Satchel Paige
krusin1 wrote:Remember Walter Cronkite "reporting" after the Tet Offensive?
"and it would also require our realization, that we should have had all along, that any negotiations must be that-negotiations, not the dictation of peace terms. "
and
"But it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could."
That wasn't "just the facts." And back then, there weren't many other sources of news available, so Walter's words went largely unchallenged.
Bottom line is that, yes, as a matter of fact, the liberal press DID contribute mightily to our loss in Vietnam.
The same Tet Offensive that was pushed back on every axis of attack the the North Vietnamese opened. Maybe Walter should have stuck to the facts.
Perhaps we might consider Mr. Cronkite's commentary in its entirety. First, it was not, nor was it meant to be "reporting", as the bolded statement should make clear. Taken in the context of a very troubled time in our history, it seems a fairly reasoned and rational examination of the situation. To a certain extent, Mr. Cronkite was voicing concerns that were already on the minds of many Americans.
I'm just curious how old those of you with such vivid memories of the Vietnam era were on February 27, 1968.
WALTER CRONKITE'S "WE ARE MIRED IN STALEMATE" BROADCAST, FEBRUARY 27, 1968
Tonight, back in more familiar surroundings in New York, we'd like to sum up our findings in Vietnam, an analysis that must be speculative, personal, subjective. Who won and who lost in the great Tet offensive against the cities? I'm not sure. The Vietcong did not win by a knockout, but neither did we. The referees of history may make it a draw. Another standoff may be coming in the big battles expected south of the Demilitarized Zone. Khesanh could well fall, with a terrible loss in American lives, prestige and morale, and this is a tragedy of our stubbornness there; but the bastion no longer is a key to the rest of the northern regions, and it is doubtful that the American forces can be defeated across the breadth of the DMZ with any substantial loss of ground. Another standoff. On the political front, past performance gives no confidence that the Vietnamese government can cope with its problems, now compounded by the attack on the cities. It may not fall, it may hold on, but it probably won't show the dynamic qualities demanded of this young nation. Another standoff.
We have been too often disappointed by the optimism of the American leaders, both in Vietnam and Washington, to have faith any longer in the silver linings they find in the darkest clouds. They may be right, that Hanoi's winter-spring offensive has been forced by the Communist realization that they could not win the longer war of attrition, and that the Communists hope that any success in the offensive will improve their position for eventual negotiations. It would improve their position, and it would also require our realization, that we should have had all along, that any negotiations must be that -- negotiations, not the dictation of peace terms. For it seems now more certain than ever that the bloody experience of Vietnam is to end in a stalemate. This summer's almost certain standoff will either end in real give-and-take negotiations or terrible escalation; and for every means we have to escalate, the enemy can match us, and that applies to invasion of the North, the use of nuclear weapons, or the mere commitment of one hundred, or two hundred, or three hundred thousand more American troops to the battle. And with each escalation, the world comes closer to the brink of cosmic disaster.
To say that we are closer to victory today is to believe, in the face of the evidence, the optimists who have been wrong in the past. To suggest we are on the edge of defeat is to yield to unreasonable pessimism. To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion. On the off chance that military and political analysts are right, in the next few months we must test the enemy's intentions, in case this is indeed his last big gasp before negotiations. But it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could.
Ukulady wrote:Just like that other war worked 30 years ago too? That was neither effective or capable in the end either......
I suggest you study some military history of the Vietnam war. The US did not lose a single major engagement in the entire war. To include Tet. Yet the media convinced the populace that we couldn't win, so the government pulled out. Not a military failure, but a failure of the will of the populace.
You measure the success of a war by how many major engagements were won. I measure the failure of a war by how many lives were lost. I was not referring to the capability of our military, I was referring to the continuing plight of the our leaders trying to force their beliefs on the rest of the world. You're blaming the media for pulling out of the war? Perhaps 58,000 dead American soldiers and a couple million college students had a little to do with it.
Problem in 'Nam was that while we may have been winning the "major engagements," the VC were fighting a guerilla war quite successfully the rest of the time. Look up the term "Pyrrhic victory."
Living my life on Island Standard Time...
Island Standard Time - the new Trop Rock album from Loren Davidson - now available!
Meanwhile, back on topic, not only do we have record-price oil, but the Attack of the Killer Tomatoes. I think it is no coincidence that the number and severity of food-borne illness incidents has gone way up during the current Administration's "let the industry police itself" era. Oh, and let's not forget lead-coated toys from China. But then, we already knew that Barbie was toxic.
Seriously...the Peak Oil crowd predicted our current oil situation - flat production, demand continuing to climb - years ago. ANWR's estimated reserves, even if you pulled them all out of the ground tomorrow, would only run the world for about two months or so, if I recall the figures correctly.
Me...I drive a Prius, I grow my own vegetables, and I think it's time to start dusting off some of the old self-reliance skills and teach them to my neighbors.
And figure out how to hook up my blender to a bicycle. The more I read the news, the more I love my margaritas.
Living my life on Island Standard Time...
Island Standard Time - the new Trop Rock album from Loren Davidson - now available!
TropicalTroubador wrote:Meanwhile, back on topic, not only do we have record-price oil, but the Attack of the Killer Tomatoes. I think it is no coincidence that the number and severity of food-borne illness incidents has gone way up during the current Administration's "let the industry police itself" era. Oh, and let's not forget lead-coated toys from China. But then, we already knew that Barbie was toxic.
Seriously...the Peak Oil crowd predicted our current oil situation - flat production, demand continuing to climb - years ago. ANWR's estimated reserves, even if you pulled them all out of the ground tomorrow, would only run the world for about two months or so, if I recall the figures correctly.
Me...I drive a Prius, I grow my own vegetables, and I think it's time to start dusting off some of the old self-reliance skills and teach them to my neighbors.
And figure out how to hook up my blender to a bicycle. The more I read the news, the more I love my margaritas.
And a decision was made to no longer keep track of the peticides used on our food An "un-necessary cost WTF
and while I may have issues with what constitutes "unreasonable levels of profit", there was the alternative to paying taxes: investment in alternative energy source research which would seem to be trying to show foresight (granted, a bit late, but better than stupidly resisting it with a motto like, "we can't tax our way out of this"). Perhaps the Dems would have done better to just rescind the tax breaks Big Oil gets and reduce their profits that way. Much harder to b**** about it in the court of public opinion when you lose a special advantage after declaring record profits..
While the effort might have been doomed, and only for show, it still looks better than blocking the effort.
TropicalTroubador wrote:Meanwhile, back on topic, not only do we have record-price oil, but the Attack of the Killer Tomatoes. I think it is no coincidence that the number and severity of food-borne illness incidents has gone way up during the current Administration's "let the industry police itself" era. Oh, and let's not forget lead-coated toys from China. But then, we already knew that Barbie was toxic.
Seriously...the Peak Oil crowd predicted our current oil situation - flat production, demand continuing to climb - years ago. ANWR's estimated reserves, even if you pulled them all out of the ground tomorrow, would only run the world for about two months or so, if I recall the figures correctly.
Me...I drive a Prius, I grow my own vegetables, and I think it's time to start dusting off some of the old self-reliance skills and teach them to my neighbors.
And figure out how to hook up my blender to a bicycle. The more I read the news, the more I love my margaritas.
Peak Oil? Grow your own vegetables? Self-reliance skills?
I am tempted to ask if you have a BOB packed in your BOV with a possible BOL in mind, and also if you know the 'secret handshake'.
I converted a vast green inedible lawn into a rather large vegetable garden a few years back, and subsequently discovered the joys of canning.
The ideas of E.F. Schumacher, John Seymour and Helen and Scott Nearing are as relevant today as they were decades ago. I still have friends living the 'back to the land' dream, although they left the commune and the Bucky dome long ago.
Margarita blender powered by a bicycle? Piece of cake.
TropicalTroubador wrote:Meanwhile, back on topic, not only do we have record-price oil, but the Attack of the Killer Tomatoes. I think it is no coincidence that the number and severity of food-borne illness incidents has gone way up during the current Administration's "let the industry police itself" era. Oh, and let's not forget lead-coated toys from China. But then, we already knew that Barbie was toxic.
Seriously...the Peak Oil crowd predicted our current oil situation - flat production, demand continuing to climb - years ago. ANWR's estimated reserves, even if you pulled them all out of the ground tomorrow, would only run the world for about two months or so, if I recall the figures correctly.
Me...I drive a Prius, I grow my own vegetables, and I think it's time to start dusting off some of the old self-reliance skills and teach them to my neighbors.
And figure out how to hook up my blender to a bicycle. The more I read the news, the more I love my margaritas.
Peak Oil? Grow your own vegetables? Self-reliance skills?
I am tempted to ask if you have a BOB packed in your BOV with a possible BOL in mind, and also if you know the 'secret handshake'.
I converted a vast green inedible lawn into a rather large vegetable garden a few years back, and subsequently discovered the joys of canning.
The ideas of E.F. Schumacher, John Seymour and Helen and Scott Nearing are as relevant today as they were decades ago. I still have friends living the 'back to the land' dream, although they left the commune and the Bucky dome long ago.
Margarita blender powered by a bicycle? Piece of cake.
Flyboy - I bet less than 1% of BNer's have even heard of Helen and Scott Nearing - let alone would subscribe to their " Living the Good Life". They were my heroes in the 70's and I have probably 30 of Scott's books( mostly on politics). My wife and I made the pilgrimmage to their home in 1978 and it was one of the most memorable days of my life.
He would truly roll over in his grave if he saw what direction this country has headed in. Thanks for bringing up thier names.
" I don't want to burn in hell; I just want to be lightly browned."
lati2d wrote: . . .
Flyboy - I bet less than 1% of BNer's have even heard of Helen and Scott Nearing - let alone would subscribe to their " Living the Good Life". They were my heroes in the 70's and I have probably 30 of Scott's books( mostly on politics). My wife and I made the pilgrimmage to their home in 1978 and it was one of the most memorable days of my life. He would truly roll over in his grave if he saw what direction this country has headed in. Thanks for bringing up thier names . . .
TropicalTroubador wrote:Meanwhile, back on topic, not only do we have record-price oil, but the Attack of the Killer Tomatoes. I think it is no coincidence that the number and severity of food-borne illness incidents has gone way up during the current Administration's "let the industry police itself" era. Oh, and let's not forget lead-coated toys from China. But then, we already knew that Barbie was toxic.
Seriously...the Peak Oil crowd predicted our current oil situation - flat production, demand continuing to climb - years ago. ANWR's estimated reserves, even if you pulled them all out of the ground tomorrow, would only run the world for about two months or so, if I recall the figures correctly.
Me...I drive a Prius, I grow my own vegetables, and I think it's time to start dusting off some of the old self-reliance skills and teach them to my neighbors.
And figure out how to hook up my blender to a bicycle. The more I read the news, the more I love my margaritas.
Peak Oil? Grow your own vegetables? Self-reliance skills?
I am tempted to ask if you have a BOB packed in your BOV with a possible BOL in mind, and also if you know the 'secret handshake'.
I converted a vast green inedible lawn into a rather large vegetable garden a few years back, and subsequently discovered the joys of canning.
The ideas of E.F. Schumacher, John Seymour and Helen and Scott Nearing are as relevant today as they were decades ago. I still have friends living the 'back to the land' dream, although they left the commune and the Bucky dome long ago.
Margarita blender powered by a bicycle? Piece of cake.
Flyboy - I bet less than 1% of BNer's have even heard of Helen and Scott Nearing - let alone would subscribe to their " Living the Good Life". They were my heroes in the 70's and I have probably 30 of Scott's books( mostly on politics). My wife and I made the pilgrimmage to their home in 1978 and it was one of the most memorable days of my life.
He would truly roll over in his grave if he saw what direction this country has headed in. Thanks for bringing up thier names.
Are they the folks that have been featured in Mother Earth News and their homestad in Maine? I think it was Maine
![[smilie=superkewl.gif]](./images/smilies/superkewl.gif "superkewl"){kind=small}
An "un-necessary cost 
