Fonda Calls Nam Photo 'An Unforgivable Mistake'

[harmonica]

I have never heard of any poll that gave us more than 15% support of the people of Vietnam.

yes I know--
1. polls!!!!!!!!??? hahahhahah we've been there before
2. you have provided ANY evidence for your claim

 

[Rigby5]

do you realize what your are trying to do with banning napalm???? you want to make war NICE!!!!!! that is total lunacy
war is not nice..it's killing/maiming/burning/slow death/bleeding to death/HORRIBLE death

Since war is not nice, how about not doing it for no reason, like Vietnam had no reason?
All weapons kill, but some weapons intentionally kill as painfully and slowly as possible, in order to maximize the terror aspect.
Those weapons all civilized people refuse to use.
And it is not me who made napalm illegal, but congress.

 

[Rigby5]

people HORRIBLY, slowly choke to death when their lungs are peppered with conventional weapon ammo/shrapnel
..again, you think it's like a movie

Sure bad deaths can always happen in unusual circumstances by accident.
But we are talking about weapons deliberately designed to always cause the most pain possible.

 

[harmonica]

Rigby5 most pain!!! MORE claims you can't prove....that's all you have been doing --babbling --no proof

 

[harmonica]

Sure bad deaths can always happen in unusual circumstances by accident.
But we are talking about weapons deliberately designed to always cause the most pain possible.

no--not unusual circumstances --jesus christ --stop thinking it's like a movie --it's not

 

[Rigby5]

yes I know--
1. polls!!!!!!!!??? hahahhahah we've been there before
2. you have provided ANY evidence for your claim

That is easy. I just have to quote Eisenhower.

{...
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, 1953-56 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Compnay, Inc., 1963), p. 372

---

I am convinced that the French could not win the war because the internal political situation in Vietnam, weak and confused, badly weakened their military position. I have never talked or corresponded with a person knowledgeable in Indochinese affairs who did not agree that had elections been held as of the time of the fighting, possibly 80 per cent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh as their leader rather than Chief of State Bao Dai. Indeed, the lack of leadership and drive on the part of Bao Dai was a factor in the feeling prevalent among Vietnamese that they had nothing to fight for. As one Frenchman said to me, "What Vietnam needs is another Syngman Rhee, regardless of all the difficulties the presence of such a personality would entail."
...}

But if you know who Syngman Rhee is, he a criminal who got kicked out of Korea for bank fraud, and later we brought back to fight the communists, and he conducted mass murder of whole civilian villages. There was not likely ever a more evil person.

 

[Rigby5]

Rigby5 most pain!!! MORE claims you can't prove....that's all you have been doing --babbling --no proof

That is silly.
We all know there is no worse way to did than to slowly be roasted to death by flames.
When people are caught up in flames like that, shooting them is the best thing to do.

 

[Rigby5]

no--not unusual circumstances --jesus christ --stop thinking it's like a movie --it's not

If it were a movie, no one would care.
Anyone who cares would try to stop needless pain.
One would stop the war in Vietnam, stop the use of napalm, etc.
We can and MUST try to stop needless pain, because it is NOT a movie.

 

[harmonica]

That is easy. I just have to quote Eisenhower.

{...
Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, 1953-56 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Compnay, Inc., 1963), p. 372

---

I am convinced that the French could not win the war because the internal political situation in Vietnam, weak and confused, badly weakened their military position. I have never talked or corresponded with a person knowledgeable in Indochinese affairs who did not agree that had elections been held as of the time of the fighting, possibly 80 per cent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh as their leader rather than Chief of State Bao Dai. Indeed, the lack of leadership and drive on the part of Bao Dai was a factor in the feeling prevalent among Vietnamese that they had nothing to fight for. As one Frenchman said to me, "What Vietnam needs is another Syngman Rhee, regardless of all the difficulties the presence of such a personality would entail."
...}

But if you know who Syngman Rhee is, he a criminal who got kicked out of Korea for bank fraud, and later we brought back to fight the communists, and he conducted mass murder of whole civilian villages. There was not likely ever a more evil person.

1. do you realize that 80% is a totally ridiculous figure for an election???
'''''In 2020, 67% of all citizens age 18 and older reported voting, up 5 percentage points from 2016 (Figure 1).2. that's not proof at all--OPINION onlya. ''''
and that was a record for voters
80% of the people don't vote---only 67% voted in the 2020 election--and that's in a 1st world country
3. remember the polls for 2016 !!!

Despite Pandemic Challenges, 2020 Election Had Largest Increase in Voting Between Presidential Elections on Record

Despite concerns that voter turnout would be lower during the pandemic, the 2020 election had the century’s highest turnout.

www.census.gov

 

[harmonica]

Rigby5
..all of your claims have been thoroughly refuted.....starting with Fonda saving THOUSANDS of lives

 

[Rigby5]

1. do you realize that 80% is a totally ridiculous figure for an election???
'''''In 2020, 67% of all citizens age 18 and older reported voting, up 5 percentage points from 2016 (Figure 1).2. that's not proof at all--OPINION onlya. ''''
and that was a record for voters
80% of the people don't vote---only 67% voted in the 2020 election--and that's in a 1st world country
3. remember the polls for 2016 !!!

Despite Pandemic Challenges, 2020 Election Had Largest Increase in Voting Between Presidential Elections on Record

Despite concerns that voter turnout would be lower during the pandemic, the 2020 election had the century’s highest turnout.

www.census.gov

People do not vote in most elections because nothing is likely to change either way.
But with Vietnam, the choice was supposed to be between Bau Dai and Ho Chi Minh.
Big diffence.
That is no doubt all of age would have voted.
In fact, it was so important, likely more like 150% would have tried to vote.

 

[Rigby5]

Rigby5
..all of your claims have been thoroughly refuted.....starting with Fonda saving THOUSANDS of lives

And how is that?
There were over 3 million killed by the war in Vietnam.
And the annual death rate was increasing, with very few killed early on.

 

[harmonica]

And how is that?
There were over 3 million killed by the war in Vietnam.
And the annual death rate was increasing, with very few killed early on.

refuted ..Fonda did not save THOUSANDS of lives

 

[Rigby5]

refuted ..Fonda did not save THOUSANDS of lives

There was some average death rate in Vietnam.
Likely something like ten thousand a year.
So if not for Fonda going there, the war would have gone on longer.
Likely for additional years.
That would mean something like an additional 20,000 deaths or more, if Fonda had not gone to Vietnam.

 

[harmonica]

There was some average death rate in Vietnam.
Likely something like ten thousand a year.
So if not for Fonda going there, the war would have gone on longer.
Likely for additional years.
That would mean something like an additional 20,000 deaths or more, if Fonda had not gone to Vietnam.

woooohoooooooo!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
total bullshit...she did not shorten the war------where are you getting these lunatic ideas??

 

[Flash]

Wrong.
The "killing fields" were in Cambodia, and for some bizarre reason, we supported Pol Pot in his use of the mass killing fields of civilians.
The Vietnamese never wanted us there.
That was always obvious.
The population of the south was equal to that of the north, and with US weapons, the south should easily have been able to capture the north in just a few months.
The fact the north was always winning, was because the people in the south would not fight because they like Ho better than Diem.
No one liked Diem.
It does not matter which US presidents were the most wrong.
What matters is just that Fonda was right.
She is just they single greatest human being the US has likely ever produced.

You are really confused about this, aren't you Moon Bat?

There would have never been a war had not the Communists decided to take over South Vietnam.

The Khmer Rouge were Communists just like North Vietnam. Same assholes. Had not the Democrats refused to support South Vietnam after the Paris Peace Accords then there never would have been the Communist takeover of the region.

Newsflash Moon Bat - The Communists were the bad guys. they were brutal and terroried the people of South Vietnam. I saw some of that terror real time while confused shitheads like you were watching what Hollywood script writers only wanted you to see.

You know nothing about the war and you being an apologist for the bitch that betrayed her country and the Americans that were doing their duty by serving just shows what a fucking low life idiot you are.

 

[Rigby5]

woooohoooooooo!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
total bullshit...she did not shorten the war------where are you getting these lunatic ideas??

Because before Fonda went to Vietnam, the people in the US thought of the Vietnamese as evil VC ninjas dressed in black pajamas.
After Fonda went to Vietnam and brought back video showing that the Vietnamese were just like us, did not deserve to die, were no threat, and had just fought for liberation from a colonial power, just like the US did, then the voters started wanting the war ended.

If you are saying the public was already turning against the war, that likely is true.
But Fonda certainly helped.

 

[Rigby5]

You are really confused about this, aren't you Moon Bat?

There would have never been a war had not the Communists decided to take over South Vietnam.

The Khmer Rouge were Communists just like North Vietnam. Same assholes. Had not the Democrats refused to support South Vietnam after the Paris Peace Accords then there never would have been the Communist takeover of the region.

Newsflash Moon Bat - The Communists were the bad guys. they were brutal and terroried the people of South Vietnam. I saw some of that terror real time while confused shitheads you were watching what Hollywood script writers only wanted you to see.

You know nothing about the war and you being an apologist for the bitch that betrayed her country and the Americans that were doing their duty by serving just shows what a fucking low life idiot you are.

No, there should NEVER have been any division at all, and Ho Chi Minh was always the desired and popular leader of all of Vietnam.
The division was never real.

And calling the Vietnamese communist is over kill.
They were never really communist, but had to pretend to be since the US refused to help them, and only Russia and China agreed to help.

And no, the "communists" in Vietnam were the good guys, that were wildly popular.
If what you say was true, then the Vietnamese would not have needed US help.
They would have won on their own.
But is was OUR puppet government in the south that were the bad guys.
They were so bad, that even the Buddhist monks were setting themselves on fire in protest.
You have to know Fonda was right or else the war would have gone the other way.

 

[Flash]

No, there should NEVER have been any division at all, and Ho Chi Minh was always the desired and popular leader of all of Vietnam.
The division was never real.

And calling the Vietnamese communist is over kill.
They were never really communist, but had to pretend to be since the US refused to help them, and only Russia and China agreed to help.

And no, the "communists" in Vietnam were the good guys, that were wildly popular.
If what you say was true, then the Vietnamese would not have needed US help.
They would have won on their own.
But is was OUR puppet government in the south that were the bad guys.
They were so bad, that even the Buddhist monks were setting themselves on fire in protest.
You have to know Fonda was right or else the war would have gone the other way.

You don't know jackshit about Vietnam Moon Bat. All you are doing is spouting sophomoric level garbage like we see on placards at a filthy Left Wing anti war rally.

You don't understand the Cold War and how Vietnam became a proxy war between the US and the Russians/Chinese.

It was never about Vietnam. It was about the post WWII spread of Communism.

Since you never served during that time I wouldn't expect you to understand.

You stupid Moon Bats are just as ignorant of History as you are Economics, Biology, Climate Science, Ethics and the Constitution.

Go back reading your Mother Jones level shit and leave the discussion of history to the adults.

 

[Rigby5]

You don't know jackshit about Vietnam Moon Bat. All you are doing is spouting sophomoric level garbage like we see on placards at a filthy Left Wing anti war rally.

You don't understand the Cold War and how Vietnam became a proxy war between the US and the Russians/Chinese.

It was never about Vietnam. It was about the post WWII spread of Communism.

Since you never served during that time I wouldn't expect you to understand.

You stupid Moon Bats are just as ignorant of History as you are Economics, Biology, Climate Science, Ethics and the Constitution.

Go back reading your Mother Jones level shit and leave the discussion of history to the adults.

I have to be right about Vietnam or with the combined manpower of the south and US weapons, Ho Chi Minh should have easily been defeated.
The fact he won, proves I have to be right, that almost no one wanted the US there, and almost all the Vietnamese supported Ho Chi Minh.

Ho Chi Minh was not anti US, so should not have been used as a pawn by the US, in any sort of Cold War with the Soviets.
If Ho Chi Minh was anti-US, he would not have come to us first for help against the French.