Say or do whatever you want on this very liberal blog, where to the best of my knowledge, Oliver has never even suggested I leave. It is his very liberal blog after all, not your very liberal blog.

Saying that the Viet Nam war was always right, is not the same thing as inviting a horse’s ass to accuse me of condoning murder. You’re not a horse’s ass, are you?

You said: “Who I may or may not have killed or wish to kill is no business of yours”, but it seems who I may or not have killed was your business: You missed the post, above, where Frank said he enlisted as non-combat. Viet Nam was always right, you see, just not right enough for him to kill for it.

And, if this is your last response to me, all I can say is, “Good riddance to bad rubbish.”

I, however, have never done any such thing to you. I’ve never called you names, I’ve never called you stupid, I have avoided, to my knowledge, using curse words against you, and I sure as hell never made baseless slander about what your family did or did not do at any point in history.

I disagree with you vehemently and often find your logic full of holes. That much is clear. And again, you know you will find that attitude in the majority of the posters on this very liberal blog. I disagree with you on my own terms and without any consultation with JadeGold or TomY or Semanticleo or whoever. When you argue with me, you are arguing with me and me alone.

So no, Frank, I’m not going to come riding to your defense the next time a poster decides to attack you. What an absurd suggestion to make. You do not have to be here. You made a conscious choice to walk into this forum and subject yourself to attack.

Who I may or may not have killed or wish to kill is no business of yours. I don’t come on here to tell long, boastful stories about myself as a means of ascribing authority and self-importance. You know diddly about who I am, and I’m just fine with that.

I’m sorry if My Lai is personal to you. But you were the one who opened that can of worms. “Always right,” you proudly proclaimed. Tossing around absolutes like that is reckless and deserved rebuttal.

This is the longest response I have written to you and I’m making it my last response to you. You cannot be trusted, Frank, to maintain a civil discourse and so I won’t be part of it. You can’t even be trusted to stay away from this VERY LIBERAL BLOG FULL OF PEOPLE WHO ATTACK YOU after you proclaimed you were shut of it months ago.

Get help, sir. Find something that makes you happy, because clearly this ain’t it.

As to attacks on your family, now you know how I feel. This is the poison seed planted by JadeGold the Putz and Loopy Velez.

I apologize. My Lai is a touchy subject with me, for personal reasons.

Now you know. Maybe, next time you’ll “be an adult” and tell them to knock it off, instead of sitting quietly by.

Incidentally, to the rest of you: I’m not debating two wars with four or five different people.

Iraq is not Viet Nam. The world today is not the world of the ’60′s. My true feeling about Iraq is simple: It would be nice if we didn’t have to go to war anywhere. But, Iraq was a “target of opportunity” – a place where we could go and do something, and expect a positive outcome. My view of it is that we have put a speed bump in the Arab street. We have stopped a tyrant who had visons of a restoration of the Persian Empire.

Having sunk its teeth into the “there were no WMD’s” meme, the left has forgotten that, and the significance of the rewards paid by Hussein to the families of suicide bombers. Libya has abandoned its nuclear weapons program, Egypt has had a real election, Syrian troops are out of Lebanon. It’s a beginning, and it represents more real action in the Middle East than there has been since the Independence of Israel, by all the US Presidents, Dem and Rep, combined.

If I found out that every single President since Reagan had lied about WMD’s in Iraq, I would still view Bush’s actions in Iraq as both necessary and valuable. There are nearly 2000 dead GI’s in Iraq. In Viet Nam, we lost 58000 guys in approximately 14 years — or about 4000 per year.

War kills people, folks — always has, always will.

Let me tell you something about my hometown: Where I live there are about 60,000 people. By some weird quirk of fate, I knew personally each and every guy that died in Viet Nam in my hometown. In a town that large, what are the odds of that happening?

It’s a message not lost on me.

None of the “developments” you cite can be directly linked to our invasion of Iraq whatsoever. Not one. I’d love to here your reasons for thinking so anyway. Care to trot a few out?

By the way, anybody want to try for the $50?

You were always “qualified” to have an opinion of the Iraq war. That isn’t what the chicken hawk argument is about. It isn’t about whether someone has the right to have an opinion about the war. “Why don’t you enlist?” is just a little question that really seems to piss off the most vocal war supporters who also happen to fall between the ages of 18 and 35. Why is that? What do they find so objectionable about the suggestion that maybe they shoudl think about acting on their opinions? If I told you that I supported democracy but then never voted you would find that kind of odd, wouldn’t you? But we’ve covered this ground before, so moving on …

What strikes me about your above description is why, after seeing Vietnam up close and personal, your opinion of the war in Iraq is still what it is. Your description of Vietnam pretty much fits what we seem to be doing in Iraq, a seemingly endless cycle of retaliation instead of a real plan for bringing the country under control. We get hit with a mortar or a roadside bomb, we move in an clean a place out and leave. A week or a month later the whole thing repeates. How long do we have to keep running through this vicious cycle?

You and other supporters of this war keep talking about some ultimate “victory.” What does that mean? A free and democratic Iraq? Well, Iraq is free now, isn’t it? It’s also a democracy now, isn’t it? They’ve held elections and will hold another one tomorrow. So what’s the hold up on that victory party? Oh right, it’s the lack of security. Which brings us back to the cycle of retaliation and this administration’s total lack of a plan from the get go to secure the country. Everyone keeps talking about training the Iraqi army. Well, the overwhelming majority of the Iraqi army are Shiites. The majority of the terrorists, so-called, in Iraq are Sunnis. So we are training Shiites to arrest or kill Sunnis. That kind of sounds like a great plan for a civil war. Victory here we come.

Wow, Frank is an arrogant, grade-A asshole. Who’da thunk it?

Fighting the encroachment of communism anywhere was worth the fight  with or without  dominoes.

So did we “win” in Vietnam? Or did we throw a ton of bodies into the gaping maw of a phantom?

Go take a time out and come back when you want to talk like an adult again.

I don’t know what the flock that means. Do you mean the military changed official policy of ‘cannon fodder’ to rotation in the ’60′s? Anyway, as you know I am not limited by the constipated 20th century definitions from the era of Goldwater. I was referring to the ‘right to life’ crowd who suddenly loses interest in the well-being of the child until he/she is of miltary age. Then they get REAL interested again. I find it fascinating that a so-called ‘culture of life’
is also overwhelmingly in favor the the DEATH penalty, and is always ready to sacrifice the under/middle class offsrpring in wars of choice.

Yes, I was there, and where I was, we were all in combat. Here’s how it worked: Charlie set up a mortar, or a small artillery piece, and fired off a few rounds. Within minutes, helicopters took off looking for them. A few minutes later, if the choppers hadn’t taken them out, jets took of, Things went “Boom!”, Charlie either ran off or went to the Happy Hunting Ground. I think that was enough combat for me. Would I sound more authoritative if I told you I went on patrols?
I pulled guard duty on the perimeter several times a month,hunkered in a bunker over an M-60. Wanna hear about the time I confronted a real live King Cobra? Oooooh, scary — but true.

Now, am I qualified to have an opinion? Or can I only be in favor of the war, if I was a Green Beret?

Now, if you want my opinion, you’ll have to wait until the subject comes up on the threads. And, remember, I was there, so my opinion counts, but you weren’t, so yours doesn’t. And you know what really pisses me off? I was there longer than Kerry, and I was wounded, and I wasn’t even nominated for President! No fair!

But I will point you to the answer, since on my screen, it’s about 8 or 10 inches up:

After my investigation, I came to several conclusions: 1) The Vietnamese were a fiercely proud, freedom – loving people. They deserved to live and be free.
2) Fighting the encroachment of communism anywhere was worth the fight  with or without  dominoes.
3) It was not unreasonable for me to approach the Army with a simple proposition: I will participate in a war, but I will not personally, willfully kill someone. I enlisted as  non – combat , not exacly a conscientious objector.

And you’re right, Curmudgeon, there is no point in debating me. I’ve debated the Viet Nam over a hundred times, with all kinds of people, from Professors to GI’s, veterans to bartenders. Based on your previous posts, you wouldn’t have a chance. And I did it all without an Internet.

Incidentally, I will personally mail a check for $50.00 to anyone who can tell me what the real meaning of the slogan on the T – Shirt is. If you get it wrong, I don’t expect anything but some good laughs.

Anyone want to try?

So that’s an answer to part of my question, and I apologise to all present for my redundancy.

But the rest remains–Were you ever anywhere NEAR the combat, Frank? How long were you there? At what point? Stationed where and doing what?

There was at least one soldier who refused to kill anyone at My Lai 4 that day. Another soldier shot himself in the foot, rather than kill a civilian (that could be a myth, but that’s what I heard)

Read Hersh’s book.

So, BD, you can go f*ck yourself and the horse that rode in on you. Was your uncle one of the people spitting on returning veterans in the SF airport? Or was it your Mom?

By the way, wysdom, did you ever wear a miltary uniform?

I doubt it.

I think, in view of the fact that I know nothing at all about you, and I don’t want to, I’m way ahead of you. So I’ll save the rest of the autobiographical details for someone who gives a sh*t.

You missed the post, above, where Frank said he enlisted as non-combat. Viet Nam was always right, you see, just not right enough for him to kill for it. It was plenty all right for others to kill and die, mind.

“Always,” Frank?

Do you have boxers that say “My Lai – That Was Right Too!”

Wow. I’m stunned. I’ve not heard such a hollow-earth, pseudological, perverted view of history since I read an essay by a holocaust revisionist.

I’m gonna see mr.curmudgeon’s “bite” and raise you another question that begs asking:

Were you there, Frank? In Viet Nam, in combat?

Sorry, curmudgeon, you’ll have to prove that one. If I may introduce you to one of the geopolitical facts of life: Even if the war in Iraq was “Pre-emptive, unjustified and illegal,” that wouldn’t necessarily make it “unwinnable.”

It was true during Viet nam {that many anti -war protestors wanted us to lose}, and as far as I’m concerned, there is no way to pull out of Iraq, anytime soon, without throwing away a possible victory.
The same thing happened in 1975,and I, for one, will never forget it, nor will I forgive Congress for it.

I have a T-shirt that says how I feel: Viet Nam — It was always right!

Unfortunately it’s one of those “time will tell” deals that are going to cost us thousands of lives and billions of dollars. I’m no general, but this is my logic; if a war is pre-emptive, you better have a damn good, rock-solid reason for going in. If not, then it is unjustified. If you go in anyhow, then it is illegal. If you can’t justify the war thoroughly, then you can’t win support at home and abroad (exactly as it’s happened). If you can’t win support at home and abroad, then you can’t win the war – ESPECIALLY if your are trying to win a “war of ideals.”

Viet Nam  It was always right!

So you’re ignorant AND proud! There’s no point in even debating you, but I’ll bite…how, exactly, was Vietnam “right”?

Perhaps I should have said Fundamentalist Islamic Republics. For more on this, from the standpoint of al Qaeda’s objectives, read Why Bali? It really is an important article.

Maybe I’m projecting, but there is no doubt that statements like Gore’s most recent statements overseas can be demoralizing.

Your research skills have obviously gotten a little rusty over the years. Which is why you free to spout whatever bullshit that comes into your head whenever the facts fail you and you need to back up your arguments without right lies. Which is, naturally, what makes you such a perfect shill for this administration. What on earth, might I ask, was the policy and strategy behind invading Iraq? Everything we were told about why we went in has been proven false except for the argument that the Iraqis deserve to live in freedom. But that’s a sentiment that isn’t exactly specific to Iraq, is it? It holds true for the entire planet, so how exactly does it serve to justify this specific invasion? How exactly did invading Iraq stop the encroachment of radical Islam? Were they encroaching on Hussein? Am I missing something here? The sad fact is that rather than inserting ourselves lamely into a civil war, as we did in Vietnam, we are now creating the conditions for a civil war. Or are you holding out hope that we haven’t simply given the Sunnis and Shiites a golden opportunity for the bloody sectarian warfare they’ve been itching for for decades? And pray tell me how does your and the president’s hope translate into a policy or a strategy? Have your read this article yet? Your hope isn’t going to keep these guys from getting their revenge when the time is right. The guys we armed and trained are talking about killing Americans. What a fanfuckingtastic way to support the troops, asshole.

ps Don’t go lecturing people about research and history when you still haven’t answered a single one of my challenges to your revisionist attempt to erase the history of the Hollywood Blacklist. Talk about intellectual cowardice, you don’t even have the guts to defend your lies.