Question for the older Generation?

Question

WWI we saved Europe from Germany.
WWII we saved Europe and the World from Nazism and The Japanese Empire.
Korean war we saved South Korea from the Communists.
Cold War we saved the world from the Soviet Union.

Through these wars the people supported the country.
Why in the Vietnam war was there so much protest against saving South Vietnam from Communist? We were not against saving South Korea. why Vietnam? And if "everyone" was against it why did it take 15 years to end it?? We were liberating Vietnam and now were liberating Iraq, why is that bad?

Serious question = Serious answer.

Thank you.

Answer 1

just to let you know I'm 62 and i have seen the change.
i really don't know why the change occurred.there are all kinds of ideas and theories.
i do know it happened in the 60's.it was a tumultuous time and all kinds of things were going on.civil rights movement,antiwar movement.
viet nam for some reason polarized us to an extent that we hadn't seen before.it continues today.
pre 1960's we were one country and then we were divided by race and politics.
the end of the cold war was not brought about by a shooting war.it ended by the leadership of the US and the realization by the USSR that they couldn't bully or outspend us in defense.
in regard to why it took 15yrs to end the viet nam war.some say because it was run by the politicians and not the generals.
i think it was because the american people became convinced that it was an unwinable war.they got tired of the body bags and also whatever success was downplayed much like today.
in summary we just aren't the people that our parents and grandparents were.
we have become so used to instant gratification and speedy
communication,computers and all the other things that technology has brought.
sorry for the tirade,but i long for the days when we were americans and not democrats or republicans.

Answer 2

Seems to me that the further we get away from the Second World War, the more complacent we become about threats to our way of life. Korea, also known as the "Forgotten War", was the start of our government not willing to go in for a win. They were happy with a "draw" and wouldn't let us take the fight into China, even though China was what kept prolonging the war.
Vietnam was another where the government dictated who, where and what we would bomb, put limitations on our troops as far as rules of engagement (free fire zones versus call for authority) and did not allow us to pursue into the North Vietnamese sanctuaries and staging areas - (Cambodia). We Americans get tired very easily of prolonged conflicts. We were war weary after WWII, and not 10 years later involved in Korea, and not 12 years later involved in Vietname, which lasted longer than any other war we had been involved in. That with the knowledge of how corrupt the South Vietnamese government was, the losses we were taking, and no clear cut objective, it gained the protests of the American people, and understandably so.
The Cold War was just a standoff between the USSR and the United States. If the war kicked off, it would have turned nuclear, and then there would be no winners.
Iraq has been liberated from Sadaam, however, we are now fighting insurgents (terrorists) that come in from different countries and are backed by Syria and Iran ( to name a couple). It is no longer a war of liberation, it is now a war against the very people that will, without hesitation come to the United States, Great Britain, etc. and fly planes into buildings, derail trains, car bomb populated areas, etc. They are the radicals that want to instill their brand and interpretation of their religion on every Christian country, and at this point won't stop, no matter how many innocents they kill in the process.
Iraq aside, this is one fight we cannot give up on.
Any thumbs down I get on this answer will be by the people who have no clear understanding of what this war on terrorism is all about.

Answer 3

Basically because higher education slowly was infiltrated by the extreme left wing. Academia has always been infatuated with Marxism. Don't forget the Soviets cultivated and paid for front organizations - it is called Agit-Prop for Agitation-Propaganda. The left moved from academia into law, into journalism, into other media, into religion, into business so that all areas of society have been infiltrated. I'm not saying the Russians still do that anymore. They don't need to. Don't forget the Domino Theory. Don't forget that "everyone" wasn't against the war. We won the Tet Offensive but Walter Cronkite reported that we lost - so we lost. Perception is reality. The result of the left getting us out of Vietnam? 3 million dead Cambodians and slavery for the people of the region.

Iraq is a kind of a different issue. Iraq is the first front on the war on terror - Islamofascism. It must be stopped before they set off a nulear bomb in New York City or Washington, D.C. The result would be a worldwide catastrophic depression. If you don't believe the way the radical Muslims do (or if you are a Jew), they slit your throat. Bush believes that moderate Muslims just want to live in peace like we do. So if he can change the whole Iraqi culture to one where they love freedom and democracy, it will give democracy a foothold in the region for the future. There is not one Islamic state in the middle east that is a democracy. So it may not work. Democrats think Muslims are incapable of self determination.

Answer 4

I think you have to look at whether or not the public percieved these wars in the same manner as the goverments that were prosecuting them.

In the case of Vietnam, you had a war that actually started prior to WW2 as an Independence movement against French Colonial Rule, railed against the Japanese occupation, then against the French again, then became a pawn in the Cold War of two great superpowers.

In the end the American people did not see the war as a just and moral one. One could argue the semantics but wars are largely won at home by propaganda and winnning the hearts and minds of those who pay taxes and sacrifice their children to the war machine.
Not pretty but it is reality.

Answer 5

As a member of the "older generation", and as a three time university graduate, with political science and history as my first two majors, I can seriously answer you by saying that our "anti-war" position in Vietnam and Iraq have most to do with politics and almost nothing to do with the "validity" or "invalidity" of the wars in question. Our nation has grown spineless and liberal, both terms meaning much the same thing, and we haven't the guts to handle hardships, and the rest of the world knows it. All the other "reasons" why we shouldn't be in those wars are only "smoke-screens" to hide the liberal / spineless / anti-war propaganda trash that our country has experienced since the days before I was a member of the "older generation". It is the very same spinelessness that has got us so deep into high gas prices. We just don't have the guts to do battle with the sources of petroleum fuels. We keep guzzling the stuff with all our fancy vehicles that we drive at high speeds and jack-rabbit starts in urban traffic, and we're unwilling to exercise any self control. That would be a "hardship" on us whimpy Americans. I, as a member of the "older generation", with average intelligence, could see this coming back when the auto makers began building the new gas-guzzlers following our first gas-crisis in the '70's, and the highway speeds began being raised back to 70mph from the 55mph they were in the first gas crisis. All these issues, the Vietnam and Iraqi Freedom wars and the latest high gas prices all come from the same source: liberal / spineless American politics. Only when we get back to serious self discipline will we ever see real freedom, in war or in commerce. God Bless you.

Answer 6

Well, initially, you're unsuitable to mention that older generations have destroyed the atmosphere. First of all, till the past due eighty's and early ninety's, we were not fully definite of what have an impact on air pollution could have at the atmosphere. Yes, we knew it was once unhealthy, however we did not recognise simply how unhealthy. It was once now not self serving consumerism that ruined whatever... it was once self serving tremendous trade who unnoticed warnings and who felt that the atmosphere was once theirs for the taking that ruined it. I think in worldwide warming and I have noticeable just lately wherein constructions are sinking by way of the ice in view that climate is simply too hot to maintain ice frozen because it must. I am ancient sufficient to look what has transformed over time, and as one that has believed that we have got to watch out and preserve, I were laughed at in view that I think that different generations, and massive organizations have had a foul outcome at the air we breath. Should the more youthful new release hate the older new release? Of path now not, however they must recognise what has occurred they usually must paintings to upgrade it... as among the older generations at the moment are doing.

Answer 7

Well first of all we alone did not "save" Europe.

In fact, we'd have to say that Russia won the European part of WW II. We won the Pacific War and assisted in the European War.

Also we didn't "save the world" from the Soviet Union. The USSR collapsed under its own corruption. It was doomed from Day One. We certainly discouraged Russia from further expansion but in fact we pretty much handed her Eastern Europe. So we sure didn't save THAT part of the world.

As for Korea, that was really a continuation of WWII, an unsettled problem that came back to haunt the world.

Vietnam, on the other hand, was purely a civil war. We took the wrong side (the side of the French and later the S. Vietnamese) and we had neither a military solution at hand or a political or moral one either.

There was little support for Vietnam because the American people did not believe that it was a communist plot for domination of Asia (and they were right, it wasn't---it was a civil war) and becuase we had no moral basis for the war. We were just killing millions of people, many of them innocent. Our hands were bloody in a bad cause.

Iraq is a similar moral, military and political mess, with no solution.

Unlike WWII, which had an identifiable and evil enemy, a high moral purpose and a military solution, Vietnam and Iraq did not.

Winning a war is not just a military problem. It require the WILL to win, the determination, the morale and the politics.

All of these are lacking in Iraq.

Answer 8

There were many that did not support any you mention, they just got little press then and get none now.

Vietnam was fought on TV. We would watch the news in case we saw a relative, friend or neighbor. We got body counts every night. Coming just after the Civil Rights fight it became popular to protest. The actual number of protesters were a very very very small number of the population. They got media coverage though and it looked like every one every place was against the war in VietNam. It was strongly supported buy Vets of WWII, they did not get media coverage.

They went to work...not sit ins.