Ken Burns' "Vietnam War" series on PBS

GrayTide · Jan 13, 2018

To this day I am still haunted by the fates of the POWs and MIAs. I often think how they must have felt waiting for their country to negotiate their release and at what point did they finally realize they had been abandoned? I wonder how the families of these men, mostly their children and siblings now, would love to have some accounting of their fate. I also wonder if and how many are still alive and what has their life been like all these years later. Questions that I am sure will never be answered.

Bamaro · Jan 13, 2018

GrayTide said:
To this day I am still haunted by the fates of the POWs and MIAs. I often think how they must have felt waiting for their country to negotiate their release and at what point did they finally realize they had been abandoned? I wonder how the families of these men, mostly their children and siblings now, would love to have some accounting of their fate. I also wonder if and how many are still alive and what has their life been like all these years later. Questions that I am sure will never be answered.

I seriously doubt that any POWs are still alive or were left there.

92tide · Jan 13, 2018

GrayTide said:
To this day I am still haunted by the fates of the POWs and MIAs. I often think how they must have felt waiting for their country to negotiate their release and at what point did they finally realize they had been abandoned? I wonder how the families of these men, mostly their children and siblings now, would love to have some accounting of their fate. I also wonder if and how many are still alive and what has their life been like all these years later. Questions that I am sure will never be answered.

i read jeremiah denton's book, when hell was in session a few times when i was a teen. it was pretty moving/disturbing. i'm sure it haunts the guys that went through it in a way that i can never understand.

92tide · Jan 13, 2018

crimsonaudio said:
When anyone trusts the US government it tells me that they've not studied history much.

unfortunately, this was true in spades in the run up to and through the first several years of the iraq and afghanistan wars.

crimsonaudio · Jan 13, 2018

92tide said:
unfortunately, this was true in spades in the run up to and through the first several years of the iraq and afghanistan wars.

If people paid attention it would be obvious that our government hasn't been trustworthy for longer than any of us have been alive...

selmaborntidefan · Jan 14, 2018

92tide said:
unfortunately, this was true in spades in the run up to and through the first several years of the iraq and afghanistan wars.

To be fair - and I can't blame anyone but Bush for this - the mixture of Afghanistan (who attacked us via Al Qaeda) and Iraq (who had nothing to do with it) clouds the issue in more than one direction.

The Afghanistan war was fully justified and should have been seen fully through. Hell, even Al Franken was in favor of that one prior to becoming a Senator. But as one on active duty military at the time, the Iraq thing made me (and still does) apprehensive. It was wrong on multiple levels, even if one buys the notion that Bush DID have reason to believe that Iraq had WMDs.

I've recently read a book on the first Bush Presidency and, of course, the crown jewel of his Presidency was Operation Desert Storm. This book was published in May 1992. Note the haunting words:

"The criticisms were, of course, unfair. As Bush pointed out on several occasions, restoring the Kuwaiti royals was among the least of the goals for which the United States had gone to war. Bush also consistently stated that 'the United States and the coalition did not go there to settle all the internal affairs of Iraq.' Those who chided Bush for not 'finishing the job' by ousting Saddam seldom through through the costs and difficulties of such a mission. 'Saddam was not going to and wait on his veranda for us,' [Robert] Gates said. 'We saw how difficult it was to find Manuel Noriega in a much smaller country with a smaller army.' Saddam's ouster would have required a full-blown takeover of Iraq, incurring additional U.S. casualties. It would have committed the United States to putting a new government in place and would certainly have splintered the wartime coalition, leaving the United States to do it alone. 'Can you imagine how we would be pounded,' Gates said, 'if we were 'bogged down' in an 'inconclusive civil war' in Iraq?'" ("Marching in Place: The Status Quo Presidency of George Bush," by Michael Duffy and Dan Goodgame, 1992: 168-9).

This was in 1992.

Iraq was ultimately a waste. And the decision to go there consequently turned Afghanistan into mostly a waste, too.

selmaborntidefan · Jan 14, 2018

crimsonaudio said:
If people paid attention it would be obvious that our government hasn't been trustworthy for longer than any of us have been alive...

It never was. Go back and look at James K. Polk (for just one example). Hell, go look at Abe Lincoln, who we're told was so great.

selmaborntidefan · Jan 14, 2018

Bamaro said:
I seriously doubt that any POWs are still alive or were left there.

I think this might be worded wrong, not sure.

I have no doubt we left some there and just lied to the people.

But I would agree that it is certain none would be alive today. They'd be 70 years old. With the war over, they were probably just executed.

Chukker Veteran · Jan 14, 2018

It's easy to point out flaws in performance and decisions made by our government. These things cited in this thread are certainly worse than flaws, and they clearly illustrate problems with democratic government. Our government consists of humans, and unfortunately humans are flawed beings.

But what, prey tell, is a better alternative?

GrayTide · Jan 14, 2018

As a veteran I can live with the fact that the government made mistakes in Vietnam, and that in war soldiers will die, go missing and be captured. What I will always resent were the many Americans, some in the government, who profited from the war or used the war to further their own political agendas. I realize that Vietnam, is "water over the dam" but is still happening today, right now and I find it detestable these officials are willing to sacrifice the lives of our military to accomplish their end game.

Bamaro · Jan 14, 2018

selmaborntidefan said:
I think this might be worded wrong, not sure.

I have no doubt we left some there and just lied to the people.

But I would agree that it is certain none would be alive today. They'd be 70 years old. With the war over, they were probably just executed.

My point was that if any were left behind they weren't POWs. NV had no motive to do so.

selmaborntidefan · Jan 14, 2018

Chukker Veteran said:
It's easy to point out flaws in performance and decisions made by our government. These things cited in this thread are certainly worse than flaws, and they clearly illustrate problems with democratic government. Our government consists of humans, and unfortunately humans are flawed beings.

But what, prey tell, is a better alternative?

There's not a better alternative to democratic government.

However - I SHOULD be able to expect any CIC (regardless of party or prior experience) to NOT get us into a war with no resolution.

To give the recent example: what happened in Iraq in 2003 was NOT a surprise to anyone with an active brain cell. We had no exit strategy and no test of "we have met our objective" so we could withdraw. The late Caspar Weinberger came up with a six-point test of when we should be willing to go to war, which is a large part of why Reagan never did it (at least not overtly; Grenada was more of a 'rescue mission' informed by the fear we'd have hostages held like in Iran).

But Operation Iraqi Freedom apparently never contemplated "okay we get Hussein THEN what." And let's be honest about what contributed to that: George W Bush was a weekend warrior (who may have not even shown up for duty for awhile) while his father was the youngest Navy pilot shot down in combat in WW2. The father brought the experience of WW2 to his decision-making in Desert Storm, and it showed. The son brought his lack of experience to the same region....and it also showed. I hold the Republicans and Democrats who voted FOR that monstrosity (including Hillary) responsible for their shameless plan of "I'll vote for the war so nobody can call me spineless, then I'll abandon it if it goes bad," but I hold Bush ultimately accountable for what was - bar none - the dumbest decision of a Presidency full of them.

I'll grant the human aspect, but I SHOULD be able to expect the GHW Bush thought process. On the fifth anniversary of Desert Storm, Bush 41 did an interview with David Frost, and Hussein was still in power. The ultimate question of killing Saddam came up and Bush wept, saying that he never could justify to himself that any American child's life (even as an adult) was worth getting Saddam Hussein.....and it would have incurred MANY more casualties, certainly in the hundreds and possibly in the thousands. (Remember - we lost over 100 soldiers just setting up to invade).

That aspect has been missing lately just as it was missing in Vietnam.

I don't have to vote for or even like the President of the USA - but I NEED to be able to TRUST that individual 100% in that level of decision. And I don't trust Trump with it, and I don't trust Hillary, either. The one guy in the last decade I think I could have trusted - Senator McCain - I didn't even vote for (his choice of who would be making decisions if he croaked was.......uh.......bizarre to put it mildly).

I don't have to have a 100% truth telling President since none exists, but I DO have to be able to trust them regarding war.

92tide · Jan 14, 2018

selmaborntidefan said:
There's not a better alternative to democratic government.

However - I SHOULD be able to expect any CIC (regardless of party or prior experience) to NOT get us into a war with no resolution.

To give the recent example: what happened in Iraq in 2003 was NOT a surprise to anyone with an active brain cell. We had no exit strategy and no test of "we have met our objective" so we could withdraw. The late Caspar Weinberger came up with a six-point test of when we should be willing to go to war, which is a large part of why Reagan never did it (at least not overtly; Grenada was more of a 'rescue mission' informed by the fear we'd have hostages held like in Iran).

But Operation Iraqi Freedom apparently never contemplated "okay we get Hussein THEN what." And let's be honest about what contributed to that: George W Bush was a weekend warrior (who may have not even shown up for duty for awhile) while his father was the youngest Navy pilot shot down in combat in WW2. The father brought the experience of WW2 to his decision-making in Desert Storm, and it showed. The son brought his lack of experience to the same region....and it also showed. I hold the Republicans and Democrats who voted FOR that monstrosity (including Hillary) responsible for their shameless plan of "I'll vote for the war so nobody can call me spineless, then I'll abandon it if it goes bad," but I hold Bush ultimately accountable for what was - bar none - the dumbest decision of a Presidency full of them.

I'll grant the human aspect, but I SHOULD be able to expect the GHW Bush thought process. On the fifth anniversary of Desert Storm, Bush 41 did an interview with David Frost, and Hussein was still in power. The ultimate question of killing Saddam came up and Bush wept, saying that he never could justify to himself that any American child's life (even as an adult) was worth getting Saddam Hussein.....and it would have incurred MANY more casualties, certainly in the hundreds and possibly in the thousands. (Remember - we lost over 100 soldiers just setting up to invade).

That aspect has been missing lately just as it was missing in Vietnam.

I don't have to vote for or even like the President of the USA - but I NEED to be able to TRUST that individual 100% in that level of decision. And I don't trust Trump with it, and I don't trust Hillary, either. The one guy in the last decade I think I could have trusted - Senator McCain - I didn't even vote for (his choice of who would be making decisions if he croaked was.......uh.......bizarre to put it mildly).

I don't have to have a 100% truth telling President since none exists, but I DO have to be able to trust them regarding war.

mccain has been one of the bigger promotors of continual war out there. remember his hilarious bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb iran.

Chukker Veteran · Jan 14, 2018

selmaborntidefan said:
There's not a better alternative to democratic government.

I've been as disgusted as anybody and really despise many things I've seen our government do. Our system is unique, when our government does go wrong, we have the press as a check. I rely on the blend between the two factors to keep us on track.

I vote Dem for many reasons, but one of the primary reasons is I think citizens and political parties should work to improve and perfect the way we are governed, the other party seems to instead want to demonize and destroy any and everything the government does that does not enrich the richest among us.

selmaborntidefan · Jan 14, 2018

Chukker Veteran said:
I've been as disgusted as anybody and really despise many things I've seen our government do. Our system is unique, when our government does go wrong, we have the press as a check. I rely on the blend between the two factors to keep us on track.

We should be able to, but we cannot. The modern press is literally a joke, nothing more than the biases of the reporters coming out in virtually every sentence. I am old enough to remember the press holding Jimmy Carter's feet to the fire when he became a strident punk in the 1980 campaign, but the modern press is nothing more than a bunch of folks who used to work for politicians in either party.

Chukker Veteran said:
I vote Dem for many reasons, but one of the primary reasons is I think citizens and political parties should work to improve and perfect the way we are governed, the other party seems to instead want to demonize and destroy any and everything the government does that does not enrich the richest among us.

The Republican problem is the same as it has been for 150 years now - the party as a whole has never sorted out exactly what the role of government should be. The Democrats have a much easier thing - just vote us in and the government knows best. Sure, they'll raise my taxes in the process for little return but the hell with me, right? Republican profess belief in virtue, Democrats believe in being Santa Claus.

Once upon a time - before the primaries became the way we choose unqualified people to be President - the two political parties had members from all across the spectrum (e.g. there were so-called liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats.....and most were somewhere in the middle). The Democrats began purging their party of anything remotely centrist after 1968 and managed to lose five of six Prez elections in the process; flush with success and confusing the election of Ronald Reagan with the notion "the country has swung to the right," the early 1990s Republicans did the exact same thing, which saw them lose four of six elections (and using popular vote, six of seven).

I've reached the point of being done with them all. There is literally not one candidate I've ever voted for that actually got there and then did what they said they were going to do. To give the most prominent example, G W Bush insisted all through the 2000 campaign that we were done with nation building, that it was a waste and didn't work......then he did precisely that very thing in Iraq and Afghanistan.

selmaborntidefan · Jan 14, 2018

92tide said:
mccain has been one of the bigger promotors of continual war out there. remember his hilarious bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb iran.

McCain simply realized that once we were into Bush's stupid war that you couldn't just pick up the tent stakes and leave on January 20, 2009. The bomb Iran joke was beyond stupid, but what I don't doubt for a second was that he would have actually thought through the ramifications of picking yet another war and - hopefully - ending the last one. That said, I still didn't vote for him.

crimsonaudio · Jan 14, 2018

Chukker Veteran said:
It's easy to point out flaws in performance and decisions made by our government. These things cited in this thread are certainly worse than flaws, and they clearly illustrate problems with democratic government. Our government consists of humans, and unfortunately humans are flawed beings.

But what, prey tell, is a better alternative?

I'm not asking for abolition, but I am suggesting that people who constantly harp for the government to have a bigger role in our lives are ignoring (or are ignorant of) history.

Chukker Veteran · Jan 15, 2018

crimsonaudio said:
I'm not asking for abolition, but I am suggesting that people who constantly harp for the government to have a bigger role in our lives are ignoring (or are ignorant of) history.

I'm not sure whether it's better to be accused of harping or being ignorant of history. :biggrin:

GrayTide · Jan 21, 2018

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/2...-start-50-years-ago-sunday.html?cmpid=prn_msn

Hard to believe it has been 50 years. Lost a high school classmate with the USMC at Khe-Sanh. Rest in Peace, Johnny.

Bamaro · Jan 23, 2018

GrayTide said:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/2...-start-50-years-ago-sunday.html?cmpid=prn_msn

Hard to believe it has been 50 years. Lost a high school classmate with the USMC at Khe-Sanh. Rest in Peace, Johnny.

Whats also hard to believe is that 2 months after the siege was broken we decided to dismantle and evacuate Khe Sanh after 274 Americans killed and 2,541 wounded.

Ken Burns' "Vietnam War" series on PBS

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

Administrator

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

Administrator

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!