02-02-2002 07:11									#91
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Is it our fault that the North Vietnamese army consisted of peasants?

	02-02-2002 07:27									#92
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Is it our fault that the North Vietnamese army consisted of peasants?

It had not been your "fault" if they were 10-year-old kids either. But you don't go bragging about bombing them to pieces, do you?

	02-02-2002 07:39									#93
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Who was bragging? Responding to someone saying they kicked our ass is bragging, now?

I don't think so.

	02-02-2002 07:49									#94
	Get a bigger avatar today!

plz ignore testing

Last edited by Bereta_Eder on 02-02-2002 at 07:57

	02-02-2002 07:56									#95
	Got spare money?

Well, bragging might have been a strong word, I was a little upset. Still, in the context of what actually happened there it seems sort of weird to prove your point about "who kicked whose butt" by citing casualty figures, especially when those casualties include one million peasants armed with rifles, killed by top modern weapons.

	02-02-2002 07:59									#96
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Well when people say they kicked our ass... especially seeing how the people that fought there got spit on when they came back. They weren't failures, they weren't losers. That is the reason for the strong remarks back.

	02-02-2002 09:43									#97
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Well when people say they kicked our ass... especially seeing how the people that fought there got spit on when they came back. They weren't failures, they weren't losers. That is the reason for the strong remarks back.

The reason they got spat on was because the American troops were killing civilians in a war that the US had no reason to be involved in.

You seem to have forgotten what the US did in Southeast Asia: B-52s carpet bombing cities, dropping napalm indiscriminately, spraying agent orange, burning villages, turning an entire country into a death zone and killing anything that moved.

The American troops have nothing to be proud of and much to be ashamed of.

	02-02-2002 09:57									#98
	Remove this text

No, they had no right to be spat on. Those people that did that were the scum of the Earth. Those soldiers fought their hardest and got little of anything. They came back, and were villianized for simply trying to stay alive.

Sorry, but when civilians start firing on you with guns, you can't take any chances. Perhaps they should have let themselves get slaughtered? You'd like that wouldn't you. Guerrila warfare leads to civilian deaths, it is the nature of it, and it is NOT their fault.

They didn't deserve half of what they were subjected to. Why do you think some of them went a little nuts. Part of it might have been the horrors of guerrila warfare, but lots was the crap treatment they recieved when they got home. No one should be subjected to that crap.

I'd like to see what you would have done if you were in their situation.

	02-02-2002 11:44									#99
	Suffering from ads?

quote: I believe the Viet Cong was actually the South Vietnamese fighting force, and the North was the Northern Alliance or something, even though nowadays people like to think we were helping someone over there, and fighting against the Viet Cong in the north.

Northern Alliance is what are the Afghans in this present action going on. Not the Vietnam war. The regular standard North Vietnamese army were known as NVA. Viet Cong were also not limited as a Southern Army made of South Vietnamese.

They were basically a guerilla outfit consisting of Northern Vietnamese and Southern Vietnamese sympathizers to the Northern cause. They fought all over the region including outside of their own borders.

	02-02-2002 15:50									#100
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui No, they had no right to be spat on. Those people that did that were the scum of the Earth. Those soldiers fought their hardest and got little of anything. They came back, and were villianized for simply trying to stay alive. Sorry, but when civilians start firing on you with guns, you can't take any chances. Perhaps they should have let themselves get slaughtered? You'd like that wouldn't you. Guerrila warfare leads to civilian deaths, it is the nature of it, and it is NOT their fault. I'd like to see what you would have done if you were in their situation.

The fault lies with the Americans who sent their troops into the country. The Americans go in and start killing people and when the people fight back in self-defence, you claim it is their fault for being killed.

More than that, you claim the civilians who didn't even fight back were to blame for being killed. Civilians in a village posed no threat to aircraft that dropped bombs upon them.

American soldiers were villified for killing innocent people. The scum of the earth were the American soldiers who killed unarmed civilians and didn't even care about it.

As for what I would have done, I would not have gone. I would have stayed in the US and fought against the war even if it meant going to prison. The soldiers were faced with a no-win situation (kill others, go to prison for refusing the draft, or dodging the draft), but they had a choice.

I agree that they should not have been spat on, but spitting on someone is far less harmful than dropping bombs on them.

	02-02-2002 16:22									#101
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

So you are blaming the American soldier for what their government did? That's fair .

As for unarmed civilians. These are the same people who are carrying bombs into your bases at night. Lulling you into false security before destroying you. Do you even happen to know what the 'civilian' population is capable of doing in a guerilla war? Lot of them weren't as 'innocent' as you seem to think.

So was America also wrong for sending troops into Korea? France? You'd want America to be truely isolationist wouldn't you?

	02-02-2002 19:23									#102
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Bad day Dis?

USA lost that one, sorry.

As for the voice of Hanoi, we see yet another area he knows nothing about, but I promised myself I wouldn't argue with idiots, so I'll leave it to the learned fellow from Rutgers to handle the matter...

	02-02-2002 20:22									#103
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui So you are blaming the American soldier for what their government did? That's fair . As for unarmed civilians. These are the same people who are carrying bombs into your bases at night. Lulling you into false security before destroying you. Do you even happen to know what the 'civilian' population is capable of doing in a guerilla war? Lot of them weren't as 'innocent' as you seem to think. So was America also wrong for sending troops into Korea? France? You'd want America to be truely isolationist wouldn't you?

The American soldiers who killed innocent civilians must accept responsibility for their actions. They cannot simply say "We had no choice, we were just obeying orders." They cannot say "I didn't pull the trigger, the American government did. They had choices, and as I have previously stated, most of those choices sucked.

Soldiers must kill in times of war, but that doesn't give any soldier the right to kill anyone tand everyone. Millions of civilians died during the Vietnam war. The United States, and the individual soldier, needs to accept responsibility for these deaths.

In fact, many American veterans have returned to Vietnam and made efforts to fix some of the damage they committed. These are truly men of honour.

And there are thousands of other American vets who have struggled with the trauma caused by the guilt of their actions.

What you seem to be saying is that all the civilians were legitimate targets. They had to be killed to save them from the communist menace, eh.

There are times when violence is justified. There are times when it is not. The American involvement in Vietnam was not justified. It achieved nothing but the deaths of thousands of American soldiers, many of whom did not want to be there, and millions of Vietnamese, innocent civilians and combatants defending their nation.

	02-02-2002 20:27									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 As for the voice of Hanoi, we see yet another area he knows nothing about, but I promised myself I wouldn't argue with idiots, so I'll leave it to the learned fellow from Rutgers to handle the matter...

Another predictable, pointless comment from Chris62. Thanks for the brilliant contribution to this discussion.

Chris: are you going to make any more infantile, boring insults or will you allow the adults to return to a discussion where people communicate without resorting to schoolyard taunts?

	02-02-2002 21:05									#105
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Another predictable, pointless comment from Chris62. Thanks for the brilliant contribution to this discussion.

Hmm, a personal attack, from a witless moron named Tinky.
How predictable.

quote: Chris: are you going to make any more infantile, boring insults or will you allow the adults to return to a discussion where people communicate without resorting to schoolyard taunts?

I said no names, you just assumed it, again confirming what a jackass you are.

	02-02-2002 21:34									#106
	Does anyone else see the irony in this? Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 Hmm, a personal attack

quote: a witless moron named Tinky.

quote: what a jackass you are.

quote: I promised myself I wouldn't argue with idiots

You're the only one throwing around insults and making personal attacks, Chris. As usual.

	02-02-2002 21:38									#107
	Tired of ads?

So, Tingkai, you'd be willing to get all of the benifits of being a citizen of your country, but you wouldn't follow it's precepts? That's like saying, hey, I don't think that stealing is a crime, so when I do it, I shouldn't have to go to jail. You are a citizen of the country, you recieve the benefits of that, and you should abide by the laws of that country.

Don't know if it was similar in the Vietnam conflict, but my grandpa joined the army during the Korean war because he figured he'd be drafted anyway and wanted to pick which service he was in. He said that if you were a smartass or got into trouble a lot, you were shipped out. So he kept a low profile and did what he was told and never had to go.

	03-02-2002 00:33									#108
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by OldWarrior_42 Northern Alliance is what are the Afghans in this present action going on. Not the Vietnam war. The regular standard North Vietnamese army were known as NVA. Viet Cong were also not limited as a Southern Army made of South Vietnamese. They were basically a guerilla outfit consisting of Northern Vietnamese and Southern Vietnamese sympathizers to the Northern cause. They fought all over the region including outside of their own borders.

There have been lots of Northern Alliances over the years. =)

My point was that lots of people thought the Viet Cong was the official, government's army of the North, 'cus that was a great deal of who we were fighting. I'm pretty sure I read that they were primarily South Vietnamese.

	03-02-2002 08:36									#109
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 Hmm, a personal attack, from a witless moron named Tinky. How predictable. I said no names, you just assumed it, again confirming what a jackass you are.

Chris: I never said you were insulting me. What I said was that your insults are predictable. Any time there is a discussion and you disagree with someone, your standard response is to throw out some asinine childhood insult. The only thing you achieve is to make yourself look ridiculous. You're not impressing anyone and you're certainly not contributing to this discussion.

	03-02-2002 08:41									#110
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: innocent civilians and combatants defending their nation.

This is your problem, you think all the civilians were harmless and innocent (when they undoubtably weren't), and that the Vietnamese that fought were all noble (ignoring the torture they committed on those South Vietnamese that weren't in good with the Communists).

When civilians have been killing you, and aren't as innocent as you thought they might have been, yeah, I can see how you might kill a few of them and believe you were saving you skin. You might even be right to do so.

	03-02-2002 08:42									#111
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by MacTBone So, Tingkai, you'd be willing to get all of the benifits of being a citizen of your country, but you wouldn't follow it's precepts? That's like saying, hey, I don't think that stealing is a crime, so when I do it, I shouldn't have to go to jail. You are a citizen of the country, you recieve the benefits of that, and you should abide by the laws of that country.

I would argue that in a democratic society, people must take responsibility for their government's decision. Either you agree with the government and support it, or you disagree and try to change things, even if that means breaking the law, but only if the law being broken is unjust. Civil disodedience in other words.

	03-02-2002 08:46									#112
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai I would argue that in a democratic society, people must take responsibility for their government's decision. Either you agree with the government and support it, or you disagree and try to change things, even if that means breaking the law, but only if the law being broken is unjust. Civil disodedience in other words.

Why just in a democratic society? Why not in a dictatorship? Why aren't you holding the people of Afghanistan responsible for the Taliban's crimes because they 'supported it' by not rebelling?

	03-02-2002 08:55									#113
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: innocent civilians and combatants defending their nation. This is your problem, you think all the civilians were harmless and innocent (when they undoubtably weren't), and that the Vietnamese that fought were all noble (ignoring the torture they committed on those South Vietnamese that weren't in good with the Communists). When civilians have been killing you, and aren't as innocent as you thought they might have been, yeah, I can see how you might kill a few of them and believe you were saving you skin. You might even be right to do so.

I never said all civilians were harmless. That's why I refer to innocent civilians as oppose to all civilians.

I agree that many civilians were actually combatants, but cettainly you must accept that many civilians who were killed posed no threat. They were just innocent civilians

I think we can agree that the American troops in Vietnam were in a difficult situation and one that I hope none of us ever experience.

At the same time, it cannot be denied that millions of innocent civilians in Vietnam were killed by Americans as a result of misguided American foreign policy.

	03-02-2002 08:59									#114
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Why just in a democratic society? Why not in a dictatorship? Why aren't you holding the people of Afghanistan responsible for the Taliban's crimes because they 'supported it' by not rebelling?

Because in a democratic society, such as the United States, civil disobedience does not result in the death penalty. It does not result in the torture and killing of your family.

	03-02-2002 09:40									#115
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by kolpo Just the idea that the one with least deads wins a war is a joke, the Russians losts extremely many people in WWII but they ended up as the biggest winner of it(they gained whole eastern Europe as pet).

Yes, Eastern Europe was/is such a prize.

Meanwhile, the poor-widdle US had to content itself with taking over the British and Japanese Empires. Man, we really lost that war big, didn't we?

	03-02-2002 09:44									#116
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Dissident The U.S. military could have continued fighting that war forever.

Part of the reason the US had to end the war was because the grunts were becoming increasingly political and unruly. Mutinies and fraggins were becoming more common. It was only a matter of time before there was a military revolt, which could have coincided a political revolt. You all would be commies today if that had happened.

	03-02-2002 10:02									#117
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Viper2263 Technically Vietnam was not war. It was a "peace keeping action.

If it walks like a duck . . .

quote: Congress never declared war, therefore the U.S. economy never shifted gears.

Ever hear of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. The Constitution does not require formal declarations of war. All it says is that Congress had the sole authority to declare war. That is what the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution did. It authorized the President to wage war in Vietnam and appropriated the money to do so.

The economy did not need to shift gears. We have never left wartime production since the Korean War. This is what Eisenhower warned about in his comment to guard against the industrial/military complex. Even today, we are at wartime production. If we were ever to stop, our economy would collapse. It's known as Permanent Wartime Economy.

quote: we simply would have produced Tanks instead of cars and trampled that d***ed forest with mechanized warfare. eliminating the gurellia's ability to fight effectively.

It's that kind of thinking that kept us in that quagmire long after analysists realized the war was unwinnable, back in the early 60s. However, people thinking like you kept insisting that they merely need to apply more force, and the Vietnamese would come around.

We bombed everything in Vietnam, North and South, all the way up to ten miles from the Chinese border. We stationed half a million men in the South. We defoliated an area of Vietnam the size of Massachussetts. This area is still unsuable for anything today because of the chemical weapons we used. We invaded two neighboring countries. We dropped more tonnage of bombs (and more bombs) on Vietnam than in all of WWII against all targets by all nations! We had battleships shelling their coasts. We mined their harbors.

WHAT MORE PRECISELY COULD THE U.S. HAVE DONE!?! . . . except kill all the non-French speaking Vietnamese (leaving 5% of the population). (If you say "invaded the North," consider that that would have resulted in another war with the Chinese. They were fully prepared to intervene if we invaded the North.)

	03-02-2002 12:30									#118
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: There have been lots of Northern Alliances over the years. =)

Possibly. I merely stated that the North Vietnamese army were not known as the Northern Alliance. No intent to insult ... just pointing out a piece of information. Use it as you wish.

And the Viet Cong consisted of North and South Vietnamese... loyal to the Northern cause.... amongst other nationals as well. Just possibly a little more info to use.

	05-02-2002 13:50									#119
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I don't have much to say about the harshness of U.S. attacks in the war. But it was a different time back then. I'm sick and tired of people using present day moralities for past wars. It's complete bullsh!t. Why don't you kids get a freakin' grip. If you are going to badmouth Vietnam, then you better bad mouth U.S. and British actions in WW2 along with Germans and Japanese. Atrocities were unheard of in those days. Now if that stuff went on today, I could understand the critisism of bombing.

But back in those days, war was war. and you faught to win. You kids weren't alive in those days. Back then war was faught to be won, not to prevent pissing people off. War was nasty business in the past. It was no picnic.

And I stand by my remarks no matter how stupid they seem . The U.S. left the war in 1973. The war was lost in 1975. You do the math . The S. Vietnamese lost the war, not the U.S. You can call the U.S. quitters, but not losers.

When I'm playing civ3 and war weariness causes every single one of my cities to riot, I stop fighting. Did I lose that war? No. I just quit for the time being. And I know civ3 isn't real life, but close enough for goverment work

	05-02-2002 15:10									#120
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Dissident I don't have much to say about the harshness of U.S. attacks in the war. But it was a different time back then. I'm sick and tired of people using present day moralities for past wars. It's complete bullsh!t. Why don't you kids get a freakin' grip.

Nice to know we have some old dinosaurs to tell us what it was like in them old days.

How ancient are you?