Walter Cronkite's Ridiculous Spin on the 1968 Tet Offensive in South Vietnam

[Soupnazi630]

The Communists from the North were fighting to enforce the Geneva Agreement of 1954. It said that the division of Vietnam in to northern and southern sectors was temporary, and it forbade the entry of foreign troops and bases into Vietnam.

Wrong they were fighting to conquer another nation.

Geneva was not a valid law to determine anything

 

[Soupnazi630]

American involvement in that war was unjust for reasons I have already stated in this thread.

Your reasons are wrong

It was abslolutely justified and valud

 

[Zincwarrior]

and still very relevant

To...who????

 

[Hector12]

Your reasons are wrong

It was abslolutely justified and valud

Why was it justified for the United States to fight against a leader who would have won a fair election, when his election would not have harmed the United States?

 

[Hector12]

Wrong they were fighting to conquer another nation.

Geneva was not a valid law to determine anything

Vietnam is one nation, not two. Vietnam veterans I have talked to told me that the Communists had considerable support in South Vietnam.

 

[JoeB131]

You cited nothing but your own backside whence you pulled out your “facts.”

They are called "History books". I am sure they are something you managed to avoid.

The government was not in fact lying

Sure they were. They told people we were supporting democracy, but the reality was we were supporting a bunch of corrupt generals.

Yes they were invaded'

Your historic spin is an out right lie

Yes, they were invaded by France in 1890, again by Japan in 1940, and then by the US in 1965.

But other than that, it was a civil war that we picked the wrong side.

When the fight was just Vietnamese, the Commies won.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Wow, that's a lot of macho chest-thumping there. I'm guessing you don't have a DD214.

The military aspects were beside the point. It wasn't the ability to hold objectives that was the issue, it was that people really started to question what the hell we were doing over there. They were questioning why the draft was taking poor people while the affluent got into the National Guard (Bush and Quayle), got college deferments (Gingrich and Cheney), or got bullshit medical excuses (Limbaugh). They honestly questioned why the South Vietnamese couldn't fight their own damned war. They were wondering why we were bombing and defoliating a smaller, weaker country for not picking the kind of government we wanted.

Now, if you were to believe Mormon Mike, (A guy who has a website where he claims the Rape of Nanking wasn't that bad, and the Japanese were justified in bombing Pear Harbor), why, this was a fantastic victory, and that dirty Pinko Conkrite stole it from us by asking the obvious question of what the hell we were doing there.

I not only have a DD 214 AND a DD 256A, I also served during Vietnam which is more than you did. I have a lot better frame of reference than you do.

 

[Seymour Flops]

They are called "History books". I am sure they are something you managed to avoid.

Do you believe tha history books are unbiased sources of truth written in all cases by dispassionate reporters of facts?

 

[Soupnazi630]

They are called "History books". I am sure they are something you managed to avoid.


Sure they were. They told people we were supporting democracy, but the reality was we were supporting a bunch of corrupt generals.


Yes, they were invaded by France in 1890, again by Japan in 1940, and then by the US in 1965.

But other than that, it was a civil war that we picked the wrong side.

When the fight was just Vietnamese, the Commies won.

No they were not they told people they were preventing the spread of communism and supporting a treaty ally both of which were true

They were invaded by North Vietnam. never by the US

It was never a civil war

Yes the conmnunists conquered them

 

[Soupnazi630]

Vietnam is one nation, not two. Vietnam veterans I have talked to told me that the Communists had considerable support in South Vietnam.

Wrong

It was historically two kingdoms.

Most vietnam veterans say different

 

[Soupnazi630]

Why was it justified for the United States to fight against a leader who would have won a fair election, when his election would not have harmed the United States?

He was not elected

Would have is irrelevant.

It was justified because he was the aggressor.

 

[Soupnazi630]

To...who????

You

 

[Zincwarrior]

You

Why me? I am a WW2 nut, not a Vietnam war nut.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Why me? I am a WW2 nut, not a Vietnam war nut.

yet you have to post here

 

[Zincwarrior]

yet you have to post here

To Pwon the Boomers.

 

[Soupnazi630]

To Pwon the Boomers.

Massive failure and clearly if it were not important you would have ignored it

 

[Zincwarrior]

Massive failure and clearly if it were not important you would have ignored it

Annoying Boomers is very important. Especially when they try to rewrite history.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Annoying Boomers is very important. Especially when they try to rewrite history.

So now you admit that it is important pick one and show some consistency

 

[JoeB131]

I not only have a DD 214 AND a DD 256A, I also served during Vietnam which is more than you did. I have a lot better frame of reference than you do.

Sure you do.

If you were actually there, you'd know what a joke our efforts were.

Which is certainly what nearly every Vietnam vet I ever talked to thought.

No they were not they told people they were preventing the spread of communism and supporting a treaty ally both of which were true

They were invaded by North Vietnam. never by the US

All of that assumes that the people we supported were legitimate as a government.

Diem canceled elections. Then the Generals canceled Diem. We weren't supporting "democracy" or a "treaty ally", we supported a bunch of thugs who were looting the country.

There was General Ky, who idolized Hitler and stole a truckload of gold on his way out.

 

[Zincwarrior]

So now you admit that it is important pick one and show some consistency

Annoying Boomers is important. The Tet Offensive is not important. This is not a history site where the issue could be properly discussed.