Viet Nam Vets are AGAINST this war in Iraq

[5stringJeff]

Back on topic (and I don't mean the ongoing AA discussion):

Is there a poll out there showing Vietnam veteran's support or objection to the GWOT and/or the Iraqi War?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
Is there a poll out there showing Vietnam veteran's support or objection to the GWOT and/or the Iraqi War?

According to Psycho there is:

"I maintain that what I say is true and based on all credible polls and publically available information I see no conflict"

We'll wait for his source.

 

[OCA]

I wonder how this got on AA????????

 

[Reilly]

Originally posted by OCA
I wonder how this got on AA????????

It wasn't a discussion about AA. It was a discussion about RWA. Never mind. Back on topic.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by OCA
I wonder how this got on AA????????

Just reread psycho's course of his posts. Then you'll understand how we plummeted into the minor leagues of commentary.

 

[jimnyc]

I think Psycho is full of baloney!

Here's results from the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation.

http://vvaf.org/worldview2003/march/slide1.html

Pay special attention to the first 3 slides. Kind off odd that the support is listed as high as it is from Vietnam veterans when Psycho claims "This facade being put forth by the Administration that our soldiers from that era are supportive of the War On Iraq is just plain false"

 

[5stringJeff]

Agreed. A 75% approval rating on the GWOT just before the imminent invasion of Iraq tells me that veterans support Bush's actions... much to the chagrin of Psychoblues and his anti-war cronies, I'm sure.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by insein
Just reread psycho's course of his posts. Then you'll understand how we plummeted into the minor leagues of commentary.

Makes sense, I don't even have to go back and reread his posts, i've had a couple run ins myself with this character and its a familiar refrain.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by jimnyc
I think Psycho is full of baloney!

Here's results from the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation.

http://vvaf.org/worldview2003/march/slide1.html

Pay special attention to the first 3 slides. Kind off odd that the support is listed as high as it is from Vietnam veterans when Psycho claims "This facade being put forth by the Administration that our soldiers from that era are supportive of the War On Iraq is just plain false"

But his proof is irrefutable. Im sure whenever he provides said proof it will be soo overwhelmingly awesome that we will be put in our place. I wonder though if he'll actually provide it or if he'll just say that hes above me again and insenuate(sp?) that im not worthy of knowing the almighty proof that he claims to have.

 

[OCA]

Or he'll talk about his classified military service in Vietnam which everything is now declassified from Vietnam or his valuable public service contributions which i've never actually seen him tell us in what capacity he served. I still maintain that he's a leftover hippie from that era and that he dropped way too much acid in a short time. Can you dig it Psycho?

 

[nycflasher]

What's wrong with dropping acid, Alice?:

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by nycflasher
What's wrong with dropping acid, Alice?:

Hehehe, well medically I don't know exactly but i'm sure it ain't like eating a bowl of oat bran. I tried it twice in college I will admit, the first time it was a friggin blast, the second time it scared the shit out of me and never touched it again.

Anyway with this guy you would've have to have been here for a while to see where that acid and hippie comment was going.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
I wonder how this got on AA????????

Reilly brought it up.

 

[Merlin1047]

I work for a defense contractor. There are 300 plus RVN vets employed by my company. To my knowledge, only one has declared some mild reservations about our attack on Iraq.

To compare Iraq to Viet Nam is simply a desperate ploy that ignores the facts. The stated motive for our involvement in Viet Nam was to prop up a government against communist aggresion. In truth, the reason for our presence was based on cynical and incompetent democrat administrations who feared an erosion of their prestige more than any communist threat. The Kennedy and Johnson administrations never had any intention of allowing a military victory. They squandered American lives simply playing for a stalemate. Unfortunately, Nixon did not change that view, but at least he eventually got us out of that mess.

Our attack on Iraq was in response to numerous attacks on this country. Although I feel that there are too many constraints on our military in Iraq, I do believe that the ultimate goal is victory, not an indefinite standoff. If you want to argue that we would have been better served attacking elsewhere, you might be correct. But I believe that most libs criticize the war in Iraq not to present a better plan, but merely to gain another talking point in a vain attempt to lend legitimacy to their blind hatred of Pres. Bush.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by Merlin1047
To compare Iraq to Viet Nam is simply a desperate ploy that ignores the facts. ...But I believe that most libs criticize the war in Iraq not to present a better plan, but merely to gain another talking point in a vain attempt to lend legitimacy to their blind hatred of Pres. Bush.

Well, they are both WARS so I think you don't have to be involved in some "desperate ploy that ignores the facts" to compare them. How can you argue that?

There are a LARGE number of Americans that don't support this war, just as there were MANY who didn't support the Vietnam War. There is undeniably a point of comparison.

I will grant you that the two wars are quite different. I will aso grant you that people may have alterior motives for questioning Bush's motives. It is, after all, an election year.

Go on and generalize about libs, that serves no one.
I admit to not neccesarily having a better plan for combatting Al Queda, but that doesn't mean I have to blindly follow my President.

I follow the ever so disturbing news reports that come out of Iraq on a daily basis. I follow the caskets that are loaded onto jets bound for the US on a daily basis. I follow my instincts. ANd I follow my intuition.

We'll see in the coming months how this all unfolds.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by nycflasher
Well, they are both WARS so I think you don't have to be involved in some "desperate ploy that ignores the facts" to compare them. How can you argue that?

OF course. All wars are the same. Why didn't I think of that. You'r a genius!

There are a LARGE number of Americans that don't support this war, just as there were MANY who didn't support the Vietnam War. There is undeniably a point of comparison.

There have always been libs.

I will grant you that the two wars are quite different.

But.. but... you said two wars must be the same.

I will aso grant you that people may have alterior motives for questioning Bush's motives. It is, after all, an election year.

Go on and generalize about libs, that serves no one.

No. the generalizations help us educate others in spotting the lib menace so you can be eliminated from society.

I admit to not neccesarily having a better plan for combatting Al Queda, but that doesn't mean I have to blindly follow my President.

Yes. Criticize and be blatantly negative with no positive suggestion. That's helpful.

I follow the ever so disturbing news reports that come out of Iraq on a daily basis. I follow the caskets that are loaded onto jets bound for the US on a daily basis. I follow my instincts. ANd I follow my intuition.

We'll see in the coming months how this all unfolds.

The deaths while tragic, are not overly voluminous, considering what has been accomplished.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
OF course. All wars are the same. Why didn't I think of that. You'r a genius!

There have always been libs.

But.. but... you said two wars must be the same.

No. the generalizations help us educate others in spotting the lib menace so you can be eliminated from society.


Yes. Criticize and be blatantly negative with no positive suggestion. That's helpful.



The deaths while tragic, are not overly voluminous, considering what has been accomplished.

More hogwash and misrepresentation.
I didn not say all wars are the same.
Nor did I say 2 wars must be the same.
Dismissed.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by nycflasher
More hogwash and misrepresentation.
I didn not say all wars are the same.
Nor did I say 2 wars must be the same.
Dismissed.

didn not is a double negative. so you did say all wars are the same.

Thanks for the dismissal. Now I can go.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by jimnyc
And yet many were there for years on multiple tours.

They were the ones who woke up screaming in the night.

 

[DKSuddeth]

The deaths while tragic, are not overly voluminous, considering what has been accomplished.

I'm sure the 10,000+, direct family members, and friends feel exactly the same way as you do.