It was disgusting on so many levels for this AWOL cokehead to be lecturing people on why Vietnam was so important 35 years later.
1. Bush is willing to admit there is a "legitimate debate" about whether Vietnam was worth figthing. America has believed it was not worth fighting since 1968. Bush isn't listening to America.
2. Bush talks about the "3 million" killed in the aftermath of America's defeat in Vietnam. But he ignores the millions of Vietnamese killed by America during the war. Just as today he ignores the 655,000 Iraqis he has killed with his war.
3. Bush acts as if the Khmer Rouge was brought to power by America's defeat in Vietnam. Again - the Khmer Rouge was NOTHING until America starting bombing Cambodia, and then the Khmer Rouge became the political voice of the peasantry.
4. Bush wants us to feel sorry for the South Vietnamese who were persecuted after America's defeat. Why? From the Vietnamese point of view, they were traitors who sided with foreigners.
2007-08-22 18:48:02 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
1. True about Viet Nam, but many soldiers want to finish the job, and many polls say they're tired of the war but want to finish what we've started.
2. That really doesn't make any sense. Are you saying the people who died because we left aren't as important as the people who died during the war? I'm not trying to be insulting, I just don't get your point.
3. Not really knowlegable about that, so I won't comment. You maybe right, you maybe wrong.
4. Yeah, I guess the slaughter of millions shouldn't be a priorty. Hey, I guess we shouldn't feel bad about the Jews in the holocaust, cause to the German they were traitors to humanity. Or hey, why feel sorry for the millions slaughtered by Pol Pot, he considered them traitors. Oh, and lets just not give a second glance to the millions upon millions Stalin murdered, cause they were traitors to the Russian state to.
2007-08-22 19:02:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Leave and we've wasted our time and good American soldiers lives. This war would be over had Bush and the Army been able to actually make the right actions (which is to take initiative and win this war at all costs) but were stuck in this standstill b/c libs are complaining and complaining and putting a stronghold on what we do there. It is the same as Vietnam, our Army could have won the war easily if we were allowed to continue with the mission and just destroy them...
2016-05-20 07:02:16 · answer #2 · answered by lovie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was public sentiment against the war and media bias that lost the war in vietnam. Bush is wrong to think that throwing more troops into Iraq with prevail!!! Just sending more of our kids to die... No matter how many more troops are sent to war... without a media black out and the war propaganda machine of equal to that of WWII... there is no way we can win any future war! Brainwashing the public is the only way to any nation in tune with it's leader, (it's sad but true) The US may have the mightiest Armed forces on the earth but without public backing they are nothing! If the Might of the nation is not focused, it cannot prevail in winning any war, In the US our might is our people!
We are so pitiful we can't even control our own borders.
2007-08-23 08:41:40 · answer #3 · answered by Darren 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While not agreeing with all your statements, Bush clearly showed a total lack of understanding of what Vietnam was all about. As unwinnable as Iraq is, Vietnam was even more so.
But then, Bush spent the war on a bar stool, so we should cut him some slack.
2007-08-22 20:33:30 · answer #4 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Bush's using Asian conflicts (Korea, Vietnam, etc) to excuse his war was offensive to me on a number of levels. First off, I have a great-uncle who is MIA from Korea - so using the sacrifice he and other MIAs made in Korea to excuse the Iraq war isn't the cool thing to do. Second, I have a number of relatives who served in Vietnam who probably did not want to go, but they still did when called. To have a charlatan who used just about every excuse in the book and had his daddy's friends pull strings to keep from going to Vietnam is even more offensive.
2007-08-22 19:18:48 · answer #5 · answered by some_guy_times_50 4 · 4⤊ 3⤋
There we are, with a Nam dodger trying to give the country a lesson on war. This guy can not sink any lower.
One thing that can be said is that we now know how impotent the American political system is when it comes to getting rid of a worthless President.
I quote John Kerry, "irresponsible and ignorant". But then we know that with an IQ of 70.
2007-08-22 19:06:05 · answer #6 · answered by Dream Realized 2 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Only liberal hippies thought the Vietnam conflict wasnt worth fighting, the rest of America supported the troops...
2007-08-22 22:10:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I thought everyone told Bush before the war that Iraq is going to be another Vietnam. Republicans really make me sick. Just because we come from the same country doesn't me I have to value your lives more than someone from another country. Hitler lovers!
2007-08-22 19:42:55 · answer #8 · answered by Beertha 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Heck we knew about comparing Iraq to Vietnam WAY before our super knowledgeable president?
2007-08-22 19:48:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
And Bush will continue "not" to listen to the American people!
He doesn't care, he just want his name in history books, that's all. Ask a Vietnam vet, we weren't allowed to win! Bush needs a reality check, drop his *** in Iraq with a weapon, "here you go, enjoy the experience"! Rather, he was like Clinton, looking for avenues out of going to Vietnam!
With government leaders like this, American people sure don't need enemies!
2007-08-22 19:02:22 · answer #10 · answered by Roland K 2 · 3⤊ 6⤋