check out a movie called, "Sir, No Sir: The Suppressed GI Movement to Stop the Vietnam War"
2006-10-31 13:47:46 · 10 answers · asked by list 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Yea, everybody knows if you see it in a movie it must be true. Just how old are you anyhow? The vast number of soldiers just wanted to do their civic duty, the same way their fathers and grandfathers had done, in World War II twenty-odd years earlier.
They served, they came home, they got out, they got jobs, married, had kids, joined the PTA and lived out the rest of their lives.
2006-10-31 16:16:55 · answer #1 · answered by Yak Rider 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm 62, so I can speak about that era with some expertise. I lived through it all. People protested that war. They didn't begin to feel animosity towards the soldiers until stories about whole villages being massacred and napalm being dropped on villages started to come out. That's when the people who were against the war in the first place began to resent the soldiers.
On the other hand, you have to understand the conditions the soldiers had to contend with in Nam. It wasn't unlike what our guys are going through in Iraq now. The Viet Cong would blend into villages and the villagers, who didn't want to be occupied by another country anymore, often hid the Viet Cong soldiers. Our soldiers would be attacked, but when they managed to fight off the enemy and advance, they would find a village of people going about business as usual and nobody knew anything about the Viet Cong. I don't know, I think I'd be pretty ticked off too.
A lot of my friends back then were drafted and shipped to Nam. There were a lot of gatherings in my living room, where war stories were told. It sounded like they were sent to hell, rather than into another country on the face of this planet. Bugs, swamps with leaches, socks rotting on your feet, not enough resupply and sometimes even being left to fend for yourself when it was considered too dangerous to try to bring in more troops.
I could go on, but I think you get the picture. Now, imagine, during Nam, our guys had to serve one tour there (one year), and could volunteer for additional time "in country". There are guys in our area who are getting ready to do a third tour in Iraq. Can you imagine how battle weary they must be?
2006-10-31 23:23:09 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Never, ever believe what you see in a movie. I never knew a Vietnam Soldier who was against the war, they became that
way after being spit upon & criticized by the people who stayed safe at home. A lot like the Iraqi War - lack of respect & support from Americans at home. It is an embarrassment that many in our nation can not support our military.
2006-10-31 22:16:52 · answer #3 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Jerry Lembcke argues that the story is bunk in his 1998 book The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam it). Lembcke, a professor of sociology at Holy Cross and a Vietnam vet, investigated hundreds of news accounts of antiwar activists spitting on vets. But every time he pushed for more evidence or corroboration from a witness, the story collapsed--the actual person who was spat on turned out to be a friend of a friend. Or somebody's uncle. He writes that he never met anybody who convinced him that any such clash took place.
I believe it was an urban legend. I've known many people who were in Vietnam and as he says, it never happened to them but they claimed it happened to someone else they heard of...
The author gives three reasons for the urband legend-The myth persists because: 1) Those who didn't go to Vietnam--that being most of us--don't dare contradict the "experience" of those who did; 2) the story helps maintain the perfect sense of shame many of us feel about the way we ignored our Vietvets; 3) the press keeps the story in play by uncritically repeating it, as the Times and U.S. News did; and 4) because any fool with 33 cents and the gumption to repeat the myth in his letter to the editor can keep it in circulation.
2006-10-31 22:18:38 · answer #4 · answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
And on top of that - many were DRAFTED - they didn't have a choice but to go! I think at that time there was this assumption that soldiers were a bunch of "baby killers" and were over there "raping and pillaging", despite the outcry of some of the veterans at the time they were anti-war.
We've matured quite a bit since then, both on the civilian and military side. It seems like our military are more like policemen these days, and even the press has been pretty reasonable in portraying our troops, so I believe this is a thing of the past.
2006-10-31 21:57:37 · answer #5 · answered by Action 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Hippies didn't care/understand, they were more mad in general about the war and the soldiers were the easiest outlet. If you spit on a politician you get a baton to the head, if you spit on a soldier you may get beaten, but less likely.
2006-10-31 21:54:53 · answer #6 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
At the time, as far as I was concerned they were just professional protestors.
If it wasn't the War they were crying about, it would have been the Trees, Seals, Whales, Cats n Dogs, just something for them to do.
2006-10-31 23:40:57 · answer #7 · answered by Sgt. VietnamVet 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the stories of the spitting are true I knew to many people who were guilty of doing that.then we fought and we are no longer friends.
2006-10-31 22:47:34 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_kerry
2006-10-31 22:14:46 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one ever spit on the returning troops. I came home twice from over seas and no one spit on me.
2006-10-31 21:58:32 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋