The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam

[longknife]

I was stationed twice at the Presidio of San Francisco during the waning years of the Vietnam Conflict - remember, it WAS NOT a war!!!

During my 1st tour, I was assigned to Headquarters, Sixth US Army and had to, on several occasions go to the airport in an official vehicle to pick up individuals returning from the area. I was spat upon TWICE - not by Hippies but some scumbag students from Berkley. [They wore university sweaters]

I was again stationed there at Letterman Hospital. When the POWs were released and came home, I remember the crowds at the gates chanting how the men who had been locked up in unbelievable conditions and undergoing torture were worthless scum who should still be held for their war crimes in the Hanoi Hilton.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The people who treated we returning VETS badly were not the HIPPIES but instead the WWII and KOREAN Vets.



Never met anyone who was spit on while in uniform.

I've never heard that before.

doesn't mean I'm saying its untrue - just that I never heard it.

As I've written before, I too suffered huge loss because of that damn (not)war and this whole question makes me very sad and angry.

I protested Vietnam, got tossed in jail in NYC for protesting, was always very vocal about how I felt about it and the deaths of those close to me. But, it was never the military, the soldiers and others who I protested or hated. It was the war itself.

Will we ever learn that we are all victims of these stupid, constant wars? Will we ever learn that we were used by the war profiteers like McNamara then, the Bush family, Cheney, Rumsfeld etc now?

War is the enemy.

Not each other.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The people who treated we returning VETS badly were not the HIPPIES but instead the WWII and KOREAN Vets.



Never met anyone who was spit on while in uniform.

[MENTION=11278]editec[/MENTION], do you have any idea why fellow vets would treat VN vets badly?

TIA

 

[whitehall]

The radical left was robbing banks and armored cars and killing Police Officers and blowing up recruiting stations. Why is it so incredible that they would spit on returning GI's? Of course they did.

 

[longly]

I've know plenty of Vietnam vets.

Many lived in their own personal hells.

Not one of them mentioned "spitting".

I am a Vietnam vet 68-72 and I never saw spitting or had that done. when i came home on leave wereing my uniform ,(in NYC) and saw non of that or have anyone of my comrades tell me that happen to them , Dirty looks maybe , but that was it. revisionist crap is right

I was run off the road for wearing my uniform on the way to work.

 

[regent]

One of the big outcomes of the war protests was the end of the draft. The military was now volunteers and it was their choice.
When the Vietnam war is done and laid to rest what will it have cost the American people, in lives monies, suffering, and what did we get for all that cost? Was the anticommunism fear so huge and so political that LBJ felt he had no choice or was LBJ so political that he reacted as the politician? What of Truman and Korea? Are we a fearful people and easily led by fear tactics?

 

[Moonglow]

WHen I served 82-88, I was told on several occasions by individuals that I was a bad man for being a soldier. I had cynics make snide comments on my professionalism and technological expertise...but then again, I still get it because I don't fit the mold of society and it's conventions...Soo I learned to make my own way through life and love those that loved me,,for me....

 

[Moonglow]

The people who treated we returning VETS badly were not the HIPPIES but instead the WWII and KOREAN Vets.



Never met anyone who was spit on while in uniform.

[MENTION=11278]editec[/MENTION], do you have any idea why fellow vets would treat VN vets badly?

TIA

Some WWII vets claimed they were crybabies and not men, that they had it just as rough or rougher than the Nam vets...In my family I had my Dad, my Uncles that served, yet they were never talked down to by my GrandFather who was a WWII vet.

 

[JakeStarkey]

i am just amazed that people are saying just cause there is no photo evidence doesnt make it untrue.....if you lived then you know the vietnam war and anything having to do with it....was on the nightly news...every night....we saw people being shot....children running down the street after being napalmed but not one damn shot of a protester spitting on a vietnam vet....like that would not be news? really?

it is just hard for some to give up their myths

sorry, bones, the myth is that spitting did not happen.

 

[Mushroom]

One of the big outcomes of the war protests was the end of the draft. The military was now volunteers and it was their choice.
When the Vietnam war is done and laid to rest what will it have cost the American people, in lives monies, suffering, and what did we get for all that cost? Was the anticommunism fear so huge and so political that LBJ felt he had no choice or was LBJ so political that he reacted as the politician? What of Truman and Korea? Are we a fearful people and easily led by fear tactics?

And once again we see revisionism in action.

How about protecting an ally? Why do so many on the left have absolutely no problem throwing another nation under a bus? Kuwait, South Vietnam, South Korea, they absolutely love to go "Hey, it is not us, so what?" and wringing their hands.

To me, the answer here is simple. South Vietnam was a US ally, and they were being attacked. Period, end of story. And I could not care less if they were attacked by the Communists, a Dictator, the Vatican, or the Boy Scouts. When an ally asks for help, you give it to them.

Why this is so ******* hard to comprehend, I have no idea. Other then I have realized over the years that a lot of "Liberals" are completely self-absorbed individuals, only wanting things that will benefit them, and screaming like little children at anything that asks for them to actually give or do something.

That like infringes on their rights to get high, man.

 

[regent]

One of the big outcomes of the war protests was the end of the draft. The military was now volunteers and it was their choice.
When the Vietnam war is done and laid to rest what will it have cost the American people, in lives monies, suffering, and what did we get for all that cost? Was the anticommunism fear so huge and so political that LBJ felt he had no choice or was LBJ so political that he reacted as the politician? What of Truman and Korea? Are we a fearful people and easily led by fear tactics?

And once again we see revisionism in action.

How about protecting an ally? Why do so many on the left have absolutely no problem throwing another nation under a bus? Kuwait, South Vietnam, South Korea, they absolutely love to go "Hey, it is not us, so what?" and wringing their hands.

To me, the answer here is simple. South Vietnam was a US ally, and they were being attacked. Period, end of story. And I could not care less if they were attacked by the Communists, a Dictator, the Vatican, or the Boy Scouts. When an ally asks for help, you give it to them.

Why this is so ******* hard to comprehend, I have no idea. Other then I have realized over the years that a lot of "Liberals" are completely self-absorbed individuals, only wanting things that will benefit them, and screaming like little children at anything that asks for them to actually give or do something.

That like infringes on their rights to get high, man.

So why did we ally with South Vietnam, was it the threat of communism that caused the alliance? Why did we help the French try to keep control of Indochina when it meant concepts America had given up in our own Revolution. Did we back the wrong side because politicians would have had a political field day attacking LBJ for being soft on communism? When is the last time America allied with a nation that benefited our nation as much as the allied nation? My point is that much of our post-war diplomacy was based fear of being soft on communism and did we overlook the possiblity of such ideas as Ho joining us rather than the Soviet bloc?

 

[Mushroom]

So why did we ally with South Vietnam, was it the threat of communism that caused the alliance? Why did we help the French try to keep control of Indochina when it meant concepts America had given up in our own Revolution.

All I can do is shake my head at the amazing display of ignorance. And you really do bounce all over the place here, but let me place it in chronological order so it makes more sense.

First off, the US did not help the French try to keep control of Indochina. They assisted the State of Vietnam, which was trying to retain control of what would become South Vietnam.

And at the end of the First Indochina War, Vietnam was partitioned into 2 countries, North to be assisted by the Soviet Union, South to be assisted by the United States.

And interestingly enough, during the cease fire for these talks over 1 million Vietnamese migrated South, while only around 52,000 migrated North. Which should give an idea which system most Vietnamese preferred to live under.

Once the US agreed to assist South Vietnam (much like it agreed to assist South Korea), it had nothing to do with what government the other nations had, but in assisting the new ally. Communists moved into and took over Cambodia and Laos, but little to nothing was done to assist them. Out of all of former French Indochina nations, the US only had an agreement with South Vietnam, so they were the only ones we were involved with.

So please back up your nonsensical claims with facts, eh? If this was "all about battling Communism" as so many Leftists claim, then why were we not "taking over" Cambodia and Laos? Why did we not actually invade North Vietnam?

We did not, we did not, and we did not. Therefore your claims are worthless.

 

[regent]

So why did we ally with South Vietnam, was it the threat of communism that caused the alliance? Why did we help the French try to keep control of Indochina when it meant concepts America had given up in our own Revolution.

All I can do is shake my head at the amazing display of ignorance. And you really do bounce all over the place here, but let me place it in chronological order so it makes more sense.

First off, the US did not help the French try to keep control of Indochina. They assisted the State of Vietnam, which was trying to retain control of what would become South Vietnam.

And at the end of the First Indochina War, Vietnam was partitioned into 2 countries, North to be assisted by the Soviet Union, South to be assisted by the United States.

And interestingly enough, during the cease fire for these talks over 1 million Vietnamese migrated South, while only around 52,000 migrated North. Which should give an idea which system most Vietnamese preferred to live under.

Once the US agreed to assist South Vietnam (much like it agreed to assist South Korea), it had nothing to do with what government the other nations had, but in assisting the new ally. Communists moved into and took over Cambodia and Laos, but little to nothing was done to assist them. Out of all of former French Indochina nations, the US only had an agreement with South Vietnam, so they were the only ones we were involved with.

So please back up your nonsensical claims with facts, eh? If this was "all about battling Communism" as so many Leftists claim, then why were we not "taking over" Cambodia and Laos? Why did we not actually invade North Vietnam?

We did not, we did not, and we did not. Therefore your claims are worthless.

Well to just address the first charge, that the US did not help the French with Indochina: the American aid to the French regarding Indochina began with the Truman administration and by 1954 the US was paying about 80% of the French costs for the war.

We can do this forever, but my point was and is that our fear of communism led to large costs in people, money, lives, suffering and we will be paying for that fear for some years to come. The question is, were we overfearful because of our own politicians used that fear for their own political purposes or was our fear justified?

 

[Mushroom]

Well to just address the first charge, that the US did not help the French with Indochina: the American aid to the French regarding Indochina began with the Truman administration and by 1954 the US was paying about 80% of the French costs for the war.

We can do this forever, but my point was and is that our fear of communism led to large costs in people, money, lives, suffering and we will be paying for that fear for some years to come. The question is, were we overfearful because of our own politicians used that fear for their own political purposes or was our fear justified?

Come back when you want to deal in facts, and not opinion and propaganda.

And this thread is not about the war itself, but the treatment of Veterans.

 

[namvet]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9KJyiXzp34]President Lyndon B. Johnson, "Why We Are in Vietnam" - YouTube[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-FibDxpkb0]Lyndon Johnson - Remarks on Decision to not seek Reelection - YouTube[/ame]

 

[regent]

Well to just address the first charge, that the US did not help the French with Indochina: the American aid to the French regarding Indochina began with the Truman administration and by 1954 the US was paying about 80% of the French costs for the war.

We can do this forever, but my point was and is that our fear of communism led to large costs in people, money, lives, suffering and we will be paying for that fear for some years to come. The question is, were we overfearful because of our own politicians used that fear for their own political purposes or was our fear justified?

Come back when you want to deal in facts, and not opinion and propaganda.

And this thread is not about the war itself, but the treatment of Veterans.

These boards are geared for opinions, and your opinion that I am dealing with opinions is
appreciated. My point again, is that we would have less veterans and other costs if politicians did not use fear to get us into conflicts for political purposes. And that's my opinion.

 

[9thIDdoc]

The assertion that the spitting and other forms of disrespect and injury were somehow a myth is the attempt to revise history in this case. And it went much further than that. Jane Fonda's outright treason-as well as that others-is well documented. But we are supposed to believe that those hippie assholes would draw the line at spiting?
I was there. It happened. And it hurt. I was highly pissed at the government for many reasons not the least of which was the fact that it allowed such illegal and downright nasty activity by civilians.

 

[9thIDdoc]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_-TBirrPiQ]Anti-War Protester Spits on Iraq War Veteran - YouTube[/ame]

 

[9thIDdoc]

Peace love and understanding for everyone (especially the enemy killing us) except the soldier.
The government (elected by the people) put us there (often via the draft) and refused to let us win. "The People" (they were quick to call themselves) reviled us and gave aid and comfort to the enemy. But now-if we say that everyone was against us-they claim we are paranoid. Drugs alcohol and suicide have been serious issues. Big surprise.

 

[editec]

The people who treated we returning VETS badly were not the HIPPIES but instead the WWII and KOREAN Vets.



Never met anyone who was spit on while in uniform.

[MENTION=11278]editec[/MENTION], do you have any idea why fellow vets would treat VN vets badly?

TIA

(as casual aside.. in my personal experience the most annoying fellow vets were not WWII vets but Korean vets)

For the same reason SOME VETS spend the rest of their lives identifying themselves by their former service experience (this board is loaded with those guys, isn't it?).

Because THEY'RE usually losers and FAKERS, too.

Back in those days the society was divided on the war and since the VN Vsets mostly were draftees and people who did not really want to be in the service, these LOSERS decided they could show how tough they were by putting down that new crop of vets.

If none of the above actually makes sense, do not blame the messenger for the fact that THEIR message is absurd.

Angry stupid people seldom make sense.