It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

History Repeating – Vietnam had “free” elections too.

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Vietnam a country divided in 1954 by the ideology of the opposing superpowers and their opposing elements in country have no comparison with Iraq of 2005.

Free elections were supposed to be held throughout the country of Vietnam but were not because of the friction between communist and nationalist elements, thereafter the country was divided until a victory was won not on the battlefield but on the political front at home in the US. The US reneged on its obligation of support in 1975 due to internal political opposition directed and funded by the communist countries supporting North Vietnam.

Iraq on the otherhand has the advantage of not having a territorial division preventing the wholesale disenfranchisement of better than half its population like happened in Vietnam (What were boat people?)

To compare the two is factual and intellectual dishonesty at best and undermining the hopes of the Iraqi people at worst.




posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
there is a distinct and dividng difference between reading and studying History (not history), and historical revisionism. You decide. I already have.



Which did you choose?

Revisionism, a la Bush administration, viz:

"We know exactly where the weapons are" revises to "We have evidence that he had weapons programs"

and

"We need to be rid of the imminent threat of immediately deployable WMDs" revises to "We know that Saddam was a bad person and that the Iraqi people will be better off with freedom and democracy the American way".



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Sardion2000,


Umm what do you consider doomsday Seekerof? You guys lost that war remember?

Let's make something clear here first, ok?
The US policy of containment worked. The war was not lost, nor did the policy "fail" till the US pulled out of South Vietnam (Saigon). If that is losing the war, then so be it, but it was not necessarily the military that lost the war, but the meddling of politicians.



Doomsday? I have yet to hear anyone proclaim doomsday will come out of the Iraq war, at least no one sane anyway.

Apparently you need to hit the ATS archives and the topics relating to Iraq, and "doomsday."



...the Iraqi people have yet to say anything at this point...

Oh yes they have. Posted an article yesterday saying a as much. More can be found if one wishes to utilize a decent search engine. BTW, it helps to turn off the rhetorical "selectovision" function, before initiating the search.




Again why equate people who are against the politics of the Gov't in power to "Doomsayers"? It makes no sense...

By my own choice and having seen the rhetoric posted within this topic thread and countless others since I have been a member of ATS dicsussing and debating the issues concerning Iraq and US foreign policy.




seekerof



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix
Iraq on the otherhand has the advantage of not having a territorial division preventing the wholesale disenfranchisement of better than half its population like happened in Vietnam



In either sense that that can be read, you're kidding, right?


*edit - that (above) not this (what I said)*

Forget it. I said I was leaving for another reality, I should make good on that. Oh look there's a Bigfoot... and a worried man pretending to be "president" addressing the nation.

[edit on 2-2-2005 by MaskedAvatar]



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 08:17 PM
link   

as posted by MaskedAvatar
Revisionism, a la Bush administration, viz:


Mincing words with you is like trying to eat food I can't stand. Please don't put words and inuendos into my mouth, and I won't do likewise with you.

You knew exactly what I meant with my reference, and if not, I give you too much intellectual credit.




seekerof

[edit on 2-2-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar

You, on the other hand, fail to point out obvious connections:

* poor implementation and execution
* death and carnage and so-called "collateral damage"
* abuse and misuse of intelligence
* oil and corruption
* irresponsible fiscal management and squandered taxpayers' funds
* failed foreign policy
.


those could apply to almost every conflict in modern times, i guess its all one big vietnam?

and vietnam was well planned, the vietcong was just better and outnumbered us, i mean they defeated 3 great military powers in 4 long wars.

[edit on 2-2-2005 by namehere]



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Repaired, standable can/can't, LOL.

[edit on 2-2-2005 by MaskedAvatar]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join