Opinion: The two wars that broke America
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The mood in America is bitter.
Hyper-partisanship has sabotaged governance and government. Extremes of left and right have infected politics and turned citizens against each other on virtually every issue. Anger and resentment now inform what passes for political dialogue.
How did the U.S. arrive at a condition where more than 70 percent of the public does not want either of the two likely presidential candidates on the ballot? About the same number are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the state of the nation.
The answer rests in two wars that broke America.
The first was Vietnam. Sixty years ago this August, Congress passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution with only two dissenting votes that committed the nation to war. At that point , a large majority of Americans believed and trusted in the government and largely supported it.
That figure has reversed since the Vietnam War. Both Democratic and Republican administrations lied about the war beginning with the Tonkin Gulf crisis, in which North Vietnamese boats did not attack two U.S. Navy destroyers operating in international waters, as had been alleged.
LINK TO SEEDED ARTICLE: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/opinion-the-two-wars-that-broke-america/ar-BB1jhGjw?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=ee5be70054b84d8489ee8599578584b6&ei=13
OFF-TOPIC COMMENTS WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT WARNING.
Tags
Who is online
444 visitors
We jumped from one diaster to another.
Disaster is putting it lightly . America always seems to be slow on the draw and quick on the trigger, resulting in a shot in the foot . Lessons from Vietnam were forgotten faster than the call to arms for Iraq . I'm of a mind, that if the draft had still been in effect, the push for conflict in the Middle East would have been more restrained . We must remember that old man Bush first picked that scab regarding Kuwait and got the ball rolling toward our current never ending "war on terrorism". Thanks to False Churches, Bigotry and Greed it's going to be never ending .
And we can see the middle east currently.
Exactly, rallying the international community to punish aggression and liberate a small country invaded by its larger, authoritarian neighbor was a terrible thing.
A most excellent post Kavika. Thank you for sharing this.
Thanks, Doc you and I sure do know what one of those wars was like.
the poor fascists are running out of ways to kill off their detractors...
Exactly, when was the last time we killed anyone in the ME?
The rest of this thread was removed for meta [ph]
The second, IMO, was the Iraq fiasco
Yes, it was Trout.
Agreed.
Tet was the beginning of the end of support for the Vietnam War and the public lost faith that LBJ was telling the truth about the war. The 'guns and butter' spending caused mounting deficits while creating inflation. Stagflation, Watergate, Iran Hostages, Middle East terrorism, Savings Loan scandal Afghanistan and Iraq, Great Recession, COVID and Illegal migration and soaring debt followed and trust in our institutions have greatly eroded.
Nixon followed LBJ and lied about the war, bombing, Laos and Cambodia then of course the break in and it was shit rolling downhill from there, Ford pardoned Nixon then the Iran Contra fiasco and the Marine suicide bombing in Beirut.
And then the ''Mother of all Lies'' the invasion in which the lying reached new heights.
There is little left of any trust in many institutions and probably none in politicians.
Yes, our political elites have quite the record. Yet many folks want to grow the government and give them even more power.
"guns and butter spending" . The military/industrial state is always the winner in any conflict . Bureaucrats create the demand and they fill it . Capitalism at it's best (Greed) . The ensuing conflict will always be fortified with Religion . Those that fight and die will be involved because of Bigotry on some level .
In 1960, our military spending was 9% of GDP, in 2021 it was 3.48%
In 1960, our military spending ($47.35B) was 61% of total federal spending, last year it was 12% of our total spending.
But what's the alternative?
Communism isn't any better.
There certainly wasn't economic fairness -- under Stalinism the rich had large luxurious apartments in Moscow, and luxurious dachas (country homes.
And for all but a few elites the economic conditions were horrible (at the time the GNP of the entire Soviet Union was equal to that of Denmark!)
Well, I should've said "in most cases".
Having lived under democratic Communism, I know its possible-- but only in small isolated settings.
Stalinism wasn't pro-religion. (Remember that famous quote: "Religion is the opiate of the masses"?)
Nor Mao, Pol Pot, Uncle Ho, Kim Jong Un, etc.
Capitalism IS the answer, but it must be regulated for fair trade and just compensation . We ARE all equal in this life and deserve a tranquil existence.
We might be working towards another...
This one will be the worse shit show ever
It certainly has that potential. It has the potential to boil over into our own streets.
a lucky break that america's enemies, the enemies of democracy, now belong to the same party.
republican and russian both begin with the letter R, [removed]
... not hard to connect those 2 dots.
watching maga get caught flat-footed when lack of support for ukraine turns into russian collaboration...
That certainly is a possibility in the ME.
We'll see where calmer heads can prevail. There are so many political flash points right now it could happen anywhere at any time. The Doomsday Clock currently sits at 90 seconds to midnight.
Yes, there are and as each week passes another is added.
It's hard to believe the Vietnam War was so long ago. It like seems almost just yesterday. What a colossal mistake that was. It really did great damage to the country, not to mention the Vietnamese and Cambodian people caught up in it.
Sadly, you are correct, G. And yet today we are still losing vets from that war to suicide and agent orange. The never-ending nightmare.
That is an excellent description.
Perhaps the best study to date:
” To our knowledge, this cohort study is the most comprehensive examination to date of the association between Vietnam War military service and suicide risk. The results showed no association between either Vietnam War–era military service or theater service and increased risk of suicide.”
I'm sure that the people that did the study were at Hue, Hamberger Hill, Khe Sanh, LZ X-Ray, the point being that if there had been no Vietnam war do you think that close to 100,000 Vietnam vets would have taken their lives?
The point of my suicide comment was that thousands die at their own hand, not if it is more or less of the general population.
I’m sure that they weren’t. Does that invalidate their study.
That seems to be true regardless of service in Vietnam.
No, but it does throw a different light on it.
Yes it does which of course had nothing to do with my comment.
I’m sorry but you’ve lost me on this.
Absolutely, yet the South Vietnamese that made it out seem forever grateful.
I doubt that the Afghans will feel the same way.
Vietnamese are Buddhist, Afghans are Muslim extremists. They don't like their own women, much less Western values . Hence the conflict of values between Iran and the U.S.
Chalk up another win for Religion !
Many Vietnamese are Catholics, Afghanis that escaped to here are probably open to our values and how does Iran impact either?
What does this remark mean?
Catholicism is a minority religion with the Vietnamese . The Afghans that escaped here know they can practice their faith openly, except in Red states. Uh, let's see, just for you, simply put, THE Ayatollah HATES WESTERN VALUES AND HATES WESTERN INTERVENTION IN THE MIDDLE EAST !
OK, just for you, ANOTHER FINE MESS "RELIGIOUS VALUES" HAS GOTTEN US INTO !
A large minority.
Link or your supposition?
No shit?
Obviously.
But what about the population?
And especially the "future population" (i.e. the younger Persians?)
Are you aware of the fact that most of them hate the Ayatollah-- and hate the extreme religiously based oppression?
Many westerners don't realize that the iranians, while a predominantly Muslim country-- they are not Arabs! (And IMO that's a major factor that gives me hope for their future).
And because they live in a theocracy, can't do a lot about it, yet!
If we had not re-installed the French after WWII and we would have stayed out of Nam, I doubt if the thousands and thousands of Vietnamese would have come to the US.
They haven't succeeded...yet.
But a lot of them, particularly the younger ones, are protesting-- and risking their lives.
Its a bit "unfashionable" in some progressive circles to criticize Iran-- because after all, it is a Muslim country. (So the struggles of those opposing the Islamist regime often don't get the coverage it deserves).
More about that (on NT)-- here:
Revolt Of The Year: The Iranian Women Uprising
What US actions re-installed the French there after WWII?
Yet!
But not for lack of trying. This was quite an uprising, but ultimately unsuccessful (2009-20100):
The Iranian Green Movement ( Persian : جنبش سبز ایران ) or Green Wave of Iran ( Persian : موج سبز ایران ), [1] also referred to as the Persian Awakening or Persian Spring by the western media, [2] refers to a political movement that arose after the June 12, 2009 Iranian presidential election and lasted until early 2010, [3] in which protesters demanded the removal of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from office.
The Green Movement protests were a major event in Iran 's modern political history and observers claimed that these protests were the largest since the Iranian Revolution of 1978–79. [6] [7] [8]
While the protests started out as a peaceful, non-violent movement, hundreds of people were arrested and several died as protests turned more violent in the following months. The movement eventually had trouble with retaining its momentum.
I have high hopes that eventually they will succeed, get the current regime out of power and become a democracy.
Persians (Current day Iranians I've known refer to themselves as "Persians" as they are proud descents of those of the ancient Persian Empire) are quite different, culturally, than Arabs in several ways..
If I'm not mistaken you stated that you retired from the army after 20 years as an officer. If that is so and you don't know the answer to the question you posed to me, I'd say that you're playing some type of game or you were never in the army. I don't care either way and I'm always interested in a good debate but I don't waste my time with nonsense.
[Deleted]
That's a real shame, I applaud their efforts !
Exactly,
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us, only sky
Livin' for today
Ah
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too
Livin' life in peace
From my experience, I have found that if one practices religion in the so-called 'Red States' one is likely to be accepted more readily than one who does not practice religion. The refugees from Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand have apparently done very well there, at least from what I have seen.
Yes, I was but I wasn't even born when the French first started to re-occupy parts of Vietnam in May 1946. The only involvement by the US then was official neutrality.
The US think started changing it's attitude four years later after the Sino-Soviet treaty and then the attack by N Korea. In May 1950, after France had been back in Vietnam for four years, Truman authorized direct financial assistance to the French.
On June 30, 1950, the first U.S. supplies for Indochina were delivered and we sent a Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) to assist the French with planning and staff work.
Apparently you weren't interested in debating Vietnam. I wasn't looking for a debate, but wanted to correct the record.
The link will show you a Muslim-American population map. [ deleted ]
[ ]
I'm think "shit" was your key word.
If you were born or not in that time period means little, you were not born during WWII but probably know quite a bit about it.
The neutrality that the US took in position to Vietnam and France was one of not wanting to see Vietnam under Vietnamese rule and the French to return to power they did this by ignoring requests from Ho Chi Mihn to President Truman in 1946.
There is the first letter from Ho Chin Minh to Truman.
This is the second letter:
Even though the US signed both documents, they expressly did not respond to Ho Chi Minh requests, which I would say is helping France re-occupy Vietnam which is what Truman and the US wanted.
As you stated in 1950 the US began supplying France with billions of dollars since the French were losing the war.
Since you only wanted to correct the record, you must have known the answer to your question before you asked me since you supplied it. You simply could have posted the information instead of the nonsense you tried.
As I said in my prior comment to you I'm always up for a good debate but not nonsense.
We disagree on what constitutes helping.
No, you have a earned reputation for knowledgeable posts here. I thought maybe I had missed some recent declassified information that we had secretly helped France back in in 1946. Sorry you felt it to be nonsense.
Vietnam and Iraq? Harlan Ullman is old enough to know better. That old, tired neoliberal trope requires ignoring a huge amount of history. Didn't all of this begin with Korea, the war that never ended? Let's ignore the Cuban missile crisis when the country learned the government couldn't do anything to protect the people. Let's ignore the 1968 Democrat convention when a political party simply declared voters don't matter. Let's ignore the Iran hostage fiasco and the failed rescue attempt by the military. Even the killing of Bin Laden involved the loss of advanced tech costing hundreds of millions. The military can spend more in 5 minutes than many people could earn in a lifetime of work and still botches up everything.
If Vietnam and Iraq are responsible for the divisions in the country then why is Joe Biden sitting in the Oval Office? Joe Biden was a Senator when Saigon fell. And 46 years later Kabul fell just like Saigon and Biden was there, too. The country seems to be aware, even if only vaguely, that today's United States couldn't win World War II. Our political leaders were there when the country started to fall apart and they're still running things the same way. Our political leaders were wrong way back then and they're still playing CYA by blaming the public. Even this seeded article is blaming the public in a backhanded manner. Maybe its time to recognize that people like Harlan Ullman have been the problem all along.
And you propose MAGA and Trump are the solution ? I detect the symptoms of a failed leader in you and the obvious envy of knowledge and experience . You and yours keep whistling that tune for chaos and we'll all be in the streets . Be certain to wear your Red Hat, it's visible from a loooong way away .
So true fineline, excellent! Awesome, absolutely awesome.
[Deleted] former 'president' and maga have been the problem all along.