Poll: Do you believe Jane Fonda is Hanoi Jane?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Pliablemoose

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
25,195
0
56
<----As I start mumbling to myself about how all the Vietnam Vets with PTSD are going to have a rough year with all this sh1t.

 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: jjones
I guess since we can all point fingers to government irresponsibility at some time or another, there are no murderers, rapists, thieves, and felons. The government did something wrong so I guess that absolves everyone else of their wrong.

hahahahaha

so in your mind, the vietnam war was a PERFECTLY legitimate conflict, Congress declared war on the Vietcong, the US WON the vietnam war, we went back and RETRIEVED all our POW's.

yah, that's REALLY what happened.

this is NOT a leftist perspective where i'm trying to shift all blame on the government. it's a matter of definitions.

She CAN'T have been a traitor because 1. War HAD not been declared on VIETNAM. 2. her actions DID NOT compromise national security. 3. WE SHOULDN'T HAVE been there in the first place.

I have stated CLEARLY that what she did was wrong TO THE POWs. but that is not the same thing as saying she was treasonous.

i have no desire to defend HER, it's just you guys talk about this whole thing as if the war was CUT and DRY and EVERYONE knew what was right and wrong at the time.

THEY DIDN'T. it's EASY in hind sight to say such and such, but at the time things WERE very confusing. the Government was LYING to us and it was hard to decipher what the truth really was.

 

DashRiprock

Member
Aug 31, 2001
166
0
76
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: DashRiprock
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Just saw the pics of Jane & Kerry protesting together...

BTW, IMHO she was & is a traitor. The war may have been wrong, but she helped the enemy.

I hate things like this. That picture is as damning as this stupidity over Bush's National Guard crap. They are both non-events. Just because he was at a protest with her, does not make him evil. It is not as if he was hoisting her on his shoulders or hugging her.
Kerry also said what she did was disgraceful.

As usual he's flip-flopped his stance. Read John Kerry's testimony to Congress while the war was still going on, that's traitorous. :|
No it isn't you sad POS. In fact his opinion carried more weight than those who didn't fight over there because he served honorably and was in Harms Way..you know in a place where little Mofo's were trying to kill his ass!

In fact a North Vietnamese general said Hanoi would have surrendered eventually if it had not been for the efforts of John Kerry's dissention that weakened Americas resolve. BTW, your the sad POS! Know your history! :|
 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Just read this thread, and I must say thank you for pi$$ing me off this early in the morning. Great, now my day is ruined.
Jane Fonda is a traitor, and should have been tried as a traitor. Imagine someone pulling some stunt like that during WWII. They would have been tried for treason. However due to the political and media situation (first time a "CNN" war took place), nothing came of it. Had the media not played such a significant role in that conflict she most likely would not have been there in the first place, and if she did, she would have been tried for treason, hopefully found guilty, and hopefully have been executed.
[/end of rant]

rolleye.gif


when did Congress declare war on Vietcong?? what was the national security implications of us being there?? would the US have gone down in flames if we HADN'T been there? Where was the national DEBATE BEFORE we went to "WAR".

it had NOTHING to do with Media coverage and EVERYTHING to do with our governments refusal to do things BY THE RULES.

We SHOULDN'T have been there and ONCE we went in, we SHOULD have at least TRIED to win the war. Finally WHO CHOOSE NOT to go back for the POW's?? was it FONDA??

IF it had been WWII she would have been shot and DESERVEDLY SO, DO NOT make it seem like the vietnam conflict was the same TYPE of war as WWII.

Nothing to do with media coverage? Are you insane. The Vietnam war was the begining of what are known as "CNN Wars". Pick up a history journal and look into this. I'd rather not post a 250 page dissertation on this topic, but amoungst current historians, we all agree with the role that the media has had on current conflicts starting with Vietnam.
As for the Vietnam war (or conflict if you will) being right and wrong, that is not the question. Go read McNamara. Go watch the new documentary on him if you are not the reading type. That will give you a little more perspective into the history of the conflict. Blame the French. Blame the Japanese. Look back to the early 1930's and you will see how the Vietnam war started and finally ended. But don't go pissing on about how it wasn't ethical. Look at the facts and not your emotions.
Fvkcing hippies.

you said NOTHING that would support going to war there.

IF the war was SO justified and "ethical" why didn't the administration put it up for national debate??

no, it has NOTHING to do with right and left, what the federal government did at the time, was WRONG.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Just read this thread, and I must say thank you for pi$$ing me off this early in the morning. Great, now my day is ruined.
Jane Fonda is a traitor, and should have been tried as a traitor. Imagine someone pulling some stunt like that during WWII. They would have been tried for treason. However due to the political and media situation (first time a "CNN" war took place), nothing came of it. Had the media not played such a significant role in that conflict she most likely would not have been there in the first place, and if she did, she would have been tried for treason, hopefully found guilty, and hopefully have been executed.
[/end of rant]

rolleye.gif


when did Congress declare war on Vietcong?? what was the national security implications of us being there?? would the US have gone down in flames if we HADN'T been there? Where was the national DEBATE BEFORE we went to "WAR".

it had NOTHING to do with Media coverage and EVERYTHING to do with our governments refusal to do things BY THE RULES.

We SHOULDN'T have been there and ONCE we went in, we SHOULD have at least TRIED to win the war. Finally WHO CHOOSE NOT to go back for the POW's?? was it FONDA??

IF it had been WWII she would have been shot and DESERVEDLY SO, DO NOT make it seem like the vietnam conflict was the same TYPE of war as WWII.

Nothing to do with media coverage? Are you insane. The Vietnam war was the begining of what are known as "CNN Wars". Pick up a history journal and look into this. I'd rather not post a 250 page dissertation on this topic, but amoungst current historians, we all agree with the role that the media has had on current conflicts starting with Vietnam.
As for the Vietnam war (or conflict if you will) being right and wrong, that is not the question. Go read McNamara. Go watch the new documentary on him if you are not the reading type. That will give you a little more perspective into the history of the conflict. Blame the French. Blame the Japanese. Look back to the early 1930's and you will see how the Vietnam war started and finally ended. But don't go pissing on about how it wasn't ethical. Look at the facts and not your emotions.
Fvkcing hippies.
Were you alive back then? Did you have friends and family who had to fight over there? It was totally unethical. Take for instance the targeting of Civilians in Hanoi by B52's. Of course they say ithat they were targeting Military and Industrial siteds but back the the munitions used were not like todays where the can pin point targets. Thousands of Civilians died in those Bombings!
 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: DashRiprock
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: DashRiprock
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Just saw the pics of Jane & Kerry protesting together...

BTW, IMHO she was & is a traitor. The war may have been wrong, but she helped the enemy.

I hate things like this. That picture is as damning as this stupidity over Bush's National Guard crap. They are both non-events. Just because he was at a protest with her, does not make him evil. It is not as if he was hoisting her on his shoulders or hugging her.
Kerry also said what she did was disgraceful.

As usual he's flip-flopped his stance. Read John Kerry's testimony to Congress while the war was still going on, that's traitorous. :|
No it isn't you sad POS. In fact his opinion carried more weight than those who didn't fight over there because he served honorably and was in Harms Way..you know in a place where little Mofo's were trying to kill his ass!

In fact a North Vietnamese general said Hanoi would have surrendered eventually if it had not been for the efforts of John Kerry's dissention that weakened Americas resolve. BTW, your the sad POS! Know your history! :|

so as usual, ends justifies the means huh??

winning or losing wasn't the issue you POS. we should NEVER have been there in the first place.

let's use your moronic ends justifies means logic.

guess what we LOST THE battle (vietnam) but WON the war on COMMUNISM, so GUESS what, the WAR THERE DID NOTHING to help us.

Kennedy didn't want to go there and he was right.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: DashRiprock
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: DashRiprock
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Just saw the pics of Jane & Kerry protesting together...

BTW, IMHO she was & is a traitor. The war may have been wrong, but she helped the enemy.

I hate things like this. That picture is as damning as this stupidity over Bush's National Guard crap. They are both non-events. Just because he was at a protest with her, does not make him evil. It is not as if he was hoisting her on his shoulders or hugging her.
Kerry also said what she did was disgraceful.

As usual he's flip-flopped his stance. Read John Kerry's testimony to Congress while the war was still going on, that's traitorous. :|
No it isn't you sad POS. In fact his opinion carried more weight than those who didn't fight over there because he served honorably and was in Harms Way..you know in a place where little Mofo's were trying to kill his ass!

In fact a North Vietnamese general said Hanoi would have surrendered eventually if it had not been for the efforts of John Kerry's dissention that weakened Americas resolve. BTW, your the sad POS! Know your history! :|
I know that history asshole, I lived it!
 

Uppsala9496

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 2001
5,272
19
81
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
How's this for perspective:
Substitute the North Vietnamese with Osama.
Does that change your opinion? It's the same thing, just with the current bad guy instead of the old bad guy.
Discuss and enjoy.

You are a moron, which VIETCONG managed to burn down the twin towers?? how many acts of terrorism had the vietcong engaged in against the US BEFORE the vietcong conflict??

OMFG.


compare vietnam more to IRAQ, not to Osama.

Obviously my point was made. You can put in whomever you want to make yourself feel better. Once again thank you for making my point!
(remember we never formally declared war against iraq, afghanistan, osama, or the taliban)
 

DashRiprock

Member
Aug 31, 2001
166
0
76
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
How's this for perspective:
Substitute the North Vietnamese with Osama.
Does that change your opinion? It's the same thing, just with the current bad guy instead of the old bad guy.
Discuss and enjoy.

You are a moron, which VIETCONG managed to burn down the twin towers?? how many acts of terrorism had the vietcong engaged in against the US BEFORE the vietcong conflict??

OMFG.


compare vietnam more to IRAQ, not to Osama.

Obviously my point was made. You can put in whomever you want to make yourself feel better. Once again thank you for making my point!
(remember we never formally declared war against iraq, afghanistan, osama, or the taliban)

If we didn't declare war when over 3,000 people were murdered on US soil in one day, then we never will. What will it take?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: DashRiprock
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
How's this for perspective:
Substitute the North Vietnamese with Osama.
Does that change your opinion? It's the same thing, just with the current bad guy instead of the old bad guy.
Discuss and enjoy.

You are a moron, which VIETCONG managed to burn down the twin towers?? how many acts of terrorism had the vietcong engaged in against the US BEFORE the vietcong conflict??

OMFG.


compare vietnam more to IRAQ, not to Osama.
WTF does this have to do with Fonda and the Vietnam War?

Obviously my point was made. You can put in whomever you want to make yourself feel better. Once again thank you for making my point!
(remember we never formally declared war against iraq, afghanistan, osama, or the taliban)

If we didn't declare war when over 3,000 people were murdered on US soil in one day, then we never will. What will it take?

 

Uppsala9496

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 2001
5,272
19
81
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Just read this thread, and I must say thank you for pi$$ing me off this early in the morning. Great, now my day is ruined.
Jane Fonda is a traitor, and should have been tried as a traitor. Imagine someone pulling some stunt like that during WWII. They would have been tried for treason. However due to the political and media situation (first time a "CNN" war took place), nothing came of it. Had the media not played such a significant role in that conflict she most likely would not have been there in the first place, and if she did, she would have been tried for treason, hopefully found guilty, and hopefully have been executed.
[/end of rant]

rolleye.gif


when did Congress declare war on Vietcong?? what was the national security implications of us being there?? would the US have gone down in flames if we HADN'T been there? Where was the national DEBATE BEFORE we went to "WAR".

it had NOTHING to do with Media coverage and EVERYTHING to do with our governments refusal to do things BY THE RULES.

We SHOULDN'T have been there and ONCE we went in, we SHOULD have at least TRIED to win the war. Finally WHO CHOOSE NOT to go back for the POW's?? was it FONDA??

IF it had been WWII she would have been shot and DESERVEDLY SO, DO NOT make it seem like the vietnam conflict was the same TYPE of war as WWII.

Nothing to do with media coverage? Are you insane. The Vietnam war was the begining of what are known as "CNN Wars". Pick up a history journal and look into this. I'd rather not post a 250 page dissertation on this topic, but amoungst current historians, we all agree with the role that the media has had on current conflicts starting with Vietnam.
As for the Vietnam war (or conflict if you will) being right and wrong, that is not the question. Go read McNamara. Go watch the new documentary on him if you are not the reading type. That will give you a little more perspective into the history of the conflict. Blame the French. Blame the Japanese. Look back to the early 1930's and you will see how the Vietnam war started and finally ended. But don't go pissing on about how it wasn't ethical. Look at the facts and not your emotions.
Fvkcing hippies.
Were you alive back then? Did you have friends and family who had to fight over there? It was totally unethical. Take for instance the targeting of Civilians in Hanoi by B52's. Of course they say ithat they were targeting Military and Industrial siteds but back the the munitions used were not like todays where the can pin point targets. Thousands of Civilians died in those Bombings!

As a matter of fact, I was alive. My father served 2+ years in the Army, was wounded 3 times, has 3 purple hearts, 2 bronze stars for valor, 1 silver star, over 30 air medals, and served in the most active unit in the conflict. Yea, I have a lot of perspective concerning this.
As for the bombing of civilians, look at what happened in WWII. Go read Flyboys.
 

Mail5398

Senior member
Jul 9, 2001
400
0
0
I hope she chokes to death. That is all. My father did not volunteer to go to Vietnam. He was drafted you idiots. She did not have to buddy up with the people who were trying to kill him. If she thinks they are so great why is she still in this country.








 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: Mail5398
I hope she chokes to death. That is all. My father did not volunteer to go to Vietnam. He was drafted you idiots. She did not have to buddy up with the people who were trying to kill him. If she thinks they are so great why is she still in this country.
You know that is a real big difference between the soldiers over in Iraq and the Soldiers in Nam. Most of those in Nam didn't want to go there and nost did not support us being there. Unlike Kerry, who could have avoided going by using a college deferment, most of those who were sent were not college educated, not supporters of the war and would have rather spent their time getting into Mary Jane Rottencrotchs panties in the back seat of their Chevy's than fight a war the was purely Political. The fact that an Elitist like Fonda would go over to North Vietnam just demoralized them even more!

 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
How's this for perspective:
Substitute the North Vietnamese with Osama.
Does that change your opinion? It's the same thing, just with the current bad guy instead of the old bad guy.
Discuss and enjoy.

You are a moron, which VIETCONG managed to burn down the twin towers?? how many acts of terrorism had the vietcong engaged in against the US BEFORE the vietcong conflict??

OMFG.


compare vietnam more to IRAQ, not to Osama.

Obviously my point was made. You can put in whomever you want to make yourself feel better. Once again thank you for making my point!
(remember we never formally declared war against iraq, afghanistan, osama, or the taliban)

whether we did or not, there was congressional approval. to compare those conflicts to vietnam really does show your bias.
 

andylawcc

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
18,185
3
81
okay, if you two don't mind me cutting in,
can any one of you two give me a reason (logical or irrational) why she did what she??
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: andylawcc
okay, if you two don't mind me cutting in,
can any one of you two give me a reason (logical or irrational) why she did what she??
Good Pot!
 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Just read this thread, and I must say thank you for pi$$ing me off this early in the morning. Great, now my day is ruined.
Jane Fonda is a traitor, and should have been tried as a traitor. Imagine someone pulling some stunt like that during WWII. They would have been tried for treason. However due to the political and media situation (first time a "CNN" war took place), nothing came of it. Had the media not played such a significant role in that conflict she most likely would not have been there in the first place, and if she did, she would have been tried for treason, hopefully found guilty, and hopefully have been executed.
[/end of rant]

rolleye.gif


when did Congress declare war on Vietcong?? what was the national security implications of us being there?? would the US have gone down in flames if we HADN'T been there? Where was the national DEBATE BEFORE we went to "WAR".

it had NOTHING to do with Media coverage and EVERYTHING to do with our governments refusal to do things BY THE RULES.

We SHOULDN'T have been there and ONCE we went in, we SHOULD have at least TRIED to win the war. Finally WHO CHOOSE NOT to go back for the POW's?? was it FONDA??

IF it had been WWII she would have been shot and DESERVEDLY SO, DO NOT make it seem like the vietnam conflict was the same TYPE of war as WWII.

Nothing to do with media coverage? Are you insane. The Vietnam war was the begining of what are known as "CNN Wars". Pick up a history journal and look into this. I'd rather not post a 250 page dissertation on this topic, but amoungst current historians, we all agree with the role that the media has had on current conflicts starting with Vietnam.
As for the Vietnam war (or conflict if you will) being right and wrong, that is not the question. Go read McNamara. Go watch the new documentary on him if you are not the reading type. That will give you a little more perspective into the history of the conflict. Blame the French. Blame the Japanese. Look back to the early 1930's and you will see how the Vietnam war started and finally ended. But don't go pissing on about how it wasn't ethical. Look at the facts and not your emotions.
Fvkcing hippies.
Were you alive back then? Did you have friends and family who had to fight over there? It was totally unethical. Take for instance the targeting of Civilians in Hanoi by B52's. Of course they say ithat they were targeting Military and Industrial siteds but back the the munitions used were not like todays where the can pin point targets. Thousands of Civilians died in those Bombings!

As a matter of fact, I was alive. My father served 2+ years in the Army, was wounded 3 times, has 3 purple hearts, 2 bronze stars for valor, 1 silver star, over 30 air medals, and served in the most active unit in the conflict. Yea, I have a lot of perspective concerning this.
As for the bombing of civilians, look at what happened in WWII. Go read Flyboys.

again, HOW CAN any sane person compare Vietnam to WWII???


there was CLEAR national security issues with WWII. matter of fact we got involved VERY VERY late because we couldnt' get a national consensus UNTIL there was clear national security implications. BOTH Germany and Japan posed a threat.

so now, are you going to try and tell me that vietcong posed that same kind of risk??


OPPPPS. the fact that we LOST in vietnam and still managed to defeat communism proves that incorrect doesn't it.
 

andylawcc

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
18,185
3
81
also, a question to Plat, would it make a difference if the Congress did approve the war and Vietname was formally and politically recognized as an enemy, then what Fonda did would be technically treasonous?



and great answer Red Dawn :) :)
 

Uppsala9496

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 2001
5,272
19
81
Originally posted by: andylawcc
okay, if you two don't mind me cutting in,
can any one of you two give me a reason (logical or irrational) why she did what she??
She did it as her way of protesting the war. Media coverage at this point in time (60's) was just becoming global, and "news" censorship in the US concerning the war was much more lax than any previous time in history.
She knew she would be on the news, and I have to assume that she figured her coverage would help spur debate about the US being involved in the conflict. She had the star power to get on every newspaper and tv channel, and she used it to protest.
 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: andylawcc
okay, if you two don't mind me cutting in,
can any one of you two give me a reason (logical or irrational) why she did what she??

what she did was wrong and stupid.

i'm just saying it wasn't treasonous, for it to have been treasonous what she did would have to have threatened national security. it didn't plain and simple.

again, i was saying take a look at the context of the times, the government WAS lying to americans. they were DRAFTING soldiers WITHOUT having declared a war (draft dodgers were justified). they were engaging in a war they had NO INTENT on winning.

in that atmosphere she excercised bad judgement.

(btw the cheap shots at kerry are just stupid).
 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: andylawcc
also, a question to Plat, would it make a difference if the Congress did approve the war and Vietname was formally and politically recognized as an enemy, then what Fonda did would be technically treasonous?



and great answer Red Dawn :) :)

IF congress had approved the war, and we had formally declared war on Vietcong, the WHOLE atmosphere of the country would have been different. She may not have EVEN GONE OVER there. there would have been only a small FRACTION of the number of protests, draft dodgers would have been minimal. the feeling by the country that their government was lying to them and sending their sons to get killed would have been SIGNIFICANTLY reduced,

so let me ask you, IF we had formally declared war on the Vietcong, do you think there would have been a difference in how the war was perceived and portrayed by the media?
 

Uppsala9496

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 2001
5,272
19
81
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Just read this thread, and I must say thank you for pi$$ing me off this early in the morning. Great, now my day is ruined.
Jane Fonda is a traitor, and should have been tried as a traitor. Imagine someone pulling some stunt like that during WWII. They would have been tried for treason. However due to the political and media situation (first time a "CNN" war took place), nothing came of it. Had the media not played such a significant role in that conflict she most likely would not have been there in the first place, and if she did, she would have been tried for treason, hopefully found guilty, and hopefully have been executed.
[/end of rant]

rolleye.gif


when did Congress declare war on Vietcong?? what was the national security implications of us being there?? would the US have gone down in flames if we HADN'T been there? Where was the national DEBATE BEFORE we went to "WAR".

it had NOTHING to do with Media coverage and EVERYTHING to do with our governments refusal to do things BY THE RULES.

We SHOULDN'T have been there and ONCE we went in, we SHOULD have at least TRIED to win the war. Finally WHO CHOOSE NOT to go back for the POW's?? was it FONDA??

IF it had been WWII she would have been shot and DESERVEDLY SO, DO NOT make it seem like the vietnam conflict was the same TYPE of war as WWII.

Nothing to do with media coverage? Are you insane. The Vietnam war was the begining of what are known as "CNN Wars". Pick up a history journal and look into this. I'd rather not post a 250 page dissertation on this topic, but amoungst current historians, we all agree with the role that the media has had on current conflicts starting with Vietnam.
As for the Vietnam war (or conflict if you will) being right and wrong, that is not the question. Go read McNamara. Go watch the new documentary on him if you are not the reading type. That will give you a little more perspective into the history of the conflict. Blame the French. Blame the Japanese. Look back to the early 1930's and you will see how the Vietnam war started and finally ended. But don't go pissing on about how it wasn't ethical. Look at the facts and not your emotions.
Fvkcing hippies.
Were you alive back then? Did you have friends and family who had to fight over there? It was totally unethical. Take for instance the targeting of Civilians in Hanoi by B52's. Of course they say ithat they were targeting Military and Industrial siteds but back the the munitions used were not like todays where the can pin point targets. Thousands of Civilians died in those Bombings!

As a matter of fact, I was alive. My father served 2+ years in the Army, was wounded 3 times, has 3 purple hearts, 2 bronze stars for valor, 1 silver star, over 30 air medals, and served in the most active unit in the conflict. Yea, I have a lot of perspective concerning this.
As for the bombing of civilians, look at what happened in WWII. Go read Flyboys.

again, HOW CAN any sane person compare Vietnam to WWII???


there was CLEAR national security issues with WWII. matter of fact we got involved VERY VERY late because we couldnt' get a national consensus UNTIL there was clear national security implications. BOTH Germany and Japan posed a threat.

so now, are you going to try and tell me that vietcong posed that same kind of risk??


OPPPPS. the fact that we LOST in vietnam and still managed to defeat communism proves that incorrect doesn't it.
"Take for instance the targeting of Civilians in Hanoi by B52's. Of course they say ithat they were targeting Military and Industrial siteds but back the the munitions used were not like todays where the can pin point targets. Thousands of Civilians died in those Bombings!"
My comparison of WWII and Vietnam has to do with this statement. In WWII, we caused more damage and civilian deaths in Japan due to Napalm than due to both atomic bombs. We on more than one occassion burned over 97% of cities to the ground. That's only 3% of a city left standing. What we did in Vietnam to civilians pales in comparison to what we did in Japan.
I don't have the time nor the incliniation to post exact numbers.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Uppsala9496
Just read this thread, and I must say thank you for pi$$ing me off this early in the morning. Great, now my day is ruined.
Jane Fonda is a traitor, and should have been tried as a traitor. Imagine someone pulling some stunt like that during WWII. They would have been tried for treason. However due to the political and media situation (first time a "CNN" war took place), nothing came of it. Had the media not played such a significant role in that conflict she most likely would not have been there in the first place, and if she did, she would have been tried for treason, hopefully found guilty, and hopefully have been executed.
[/end of rant]

rolleye.gif


when did Congress declare war on Vietcong?? what was the national security implications of us being there?? would the US have gone down in flames if we HADN'T been there? Where was the national DEBATE BEFORE we went to "WAR".

it had NOTHING to do with Media coverage and EVERYTHING to do with our governments refusal to do things BY THE RULES.

We SHOULDN'T have been there and ONCE we went in, we SHOULD have at least TRIED to win the war. Finally WHO CHOOSE NOT to go back for the POW's?? was it FONDA??

IF it had been WWII she would have been shot and DESERVEDLY SO, DO NOT make it seem like the vietnam conflict was the same TYPE of war as WWII.

Nothing to do with media coverage? Are you insane. The Vietnam war was the begining of what are known as "CNN Wars". Pick up a history journal and look into this. I'd rather not post a 250 page dissertation on this topic, but amoungst current historians, we all agree with the role that the media has had on current conflicts starting with Vietnam.
As for the Vietnam war (or conflict if you will) being right and wrong, that is not the question. Go read McNamara. Go watch the new documentary on him if you are not the reading type. That will give you a little more perspective into the history of the conflict. Blame the French. Blame the Japanese. Look back to the early 1930's and you will see how the Vietnam war started and finally ended. But don't go pissing on about how it wasn't ethical. Look at the facts and not your emotions.
Fvkcing hippies.
Were you alive back then? Did you have friends and family who had to fight over there? It was totally unethical. Take for instance the targeting of Civilians in Hanoi by B52's. Of course they say ithat they were targeting Military and Industrial siteds but back the the munitions used were not like todays where the can pin point targets. Thousands of Civilians died in those Bombings!

As a matter of fact, I was alive. My father served 2+ years in the Army, was wounded 3 times, has 3 purple hearts, 2 bronze stars for valor, 1 silver star, over 30 air medals, and served in the most active unit in the conflict. Yea, I have a lot of perspective concerning this.
As for the bombing of civilians, look at what happened in WWII. Go read Flyboys.
The perspective or a War Hero. To go through all of that he must have believed in what he was doing. I wonder how many of his fellow soldiers he saw die needlessly in that Clusterfsck of a war?


Originally posted by: andylawcc
also, a question to Plat, would it make a difference if the Congress did approve the war and Vietname was formally and politically recognized as an enemy, then what Fonda did would be technically treasonous?



and great answer Red Dawn :) :)
Actually back then she was Married to the Radical Tom Hardin who was one of the Leaders for the Far Left SDS and one of the defendants in the Chicago 7 trial so I am sure he had a lot of influence over her. BTW, he was there too!

 

jjones

Lifer
Oct 9, 2001
15,425
2
0
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: jjones
I guess since we can all point fingers to government irresponsibility at some time or another, there are no murderers, rapists, thieves, and felons. The government did something wrong so I guess that absolves everyone else of their wrong.

hahahahaha

so in your mind, the vietnam war was a PERFECTLY legitimate conflict, Congress declared war on the Vietcong, the US WON the vietnam war, we went back and RETRIEVED all our POW's.

yah, that's REALLY what happened.

this is NOT a leftist perspective where i'm trying to shift all blame on the government. it's a matter of definitions.

She CAN'T have been a traitor because 1. War HAD not been declared on VIETNAM. 2. her actions DID NOT compromise national security. 3. WE SHOULDN'T HAVE been there in the first place.

I have stated CLEARLY that what she did was wrong TO THE POWs. but that is not the same thing as saying she was treasonous.

i have no desire to defend HER, it's just you guys talk about this whole thing as if the war was CUT and DRY and EVERYONE knew what was right and wrong at the time.

THEY DIDN'T. it's EASY in hind sight to say such and such, but at the time things WERE very confusing. the Government was LYING to us and it was hard to decipher what the truth really was.
You really are a frickin' moron. When will you get it into your head, that despite the view of whether or not the war was legal, ethical or otherwise, she collaborated with the enemy. The US government chose military action. She did much more than protest the government's action, she actually aided the enemy, to the detriment of those soldiers. She's a traitor plain and simple when she crosed that line from being a protester to collaborator.
 

andylawcc

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
18,185
3
81
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: andylawcc
okay, if you two don't mind me cutting in,
can any one of you two give me a reason (logical or irrational) why she did what she??

what she did was wrong and stupid.

i'm just saying it wasn't treasonous, for it to have been treasonous what she did would have to have threatened national security. it didn't plain and simple.

again, i was saying take a look at the context of the times, the government WAS lying to americans. they were DRAFTING soldiers WITHOUT having declared a war (draft dodgers were justified). they were engaging in a war they had NO INTENT on winning.

in that atmosphere she excercised bad judgement.


so on a personal note (which is subjective and have no absolute right or wrong answer),
would you hate her or even shot her if you were a soldier out there?




and thank you for your answer, and same to you Uppsala9496.