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.

 

31 Vietnam Vets Die in Hanoi Today

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 09:01 AM
link   
This is just a horrible tragedy.


Link To Article - Viet war veterans die in crash

My thoughts and prayers go out to the survivors and the families of the victims.

edit: changed "killed" to "die" in subject as to avoid confusion.

[edit on 21-4-2005 by cohiba]




posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Is there a difference between the words died and killed.

they died in a plane wreck...or they were killed in a plane crash

I don't know. What do you think?



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by 00PS
Is there a difference between the words died and killed.

they died in a plane wreck...or they were killed in a plane crash

I don't know. What do you think?


Killed means to be put to death somehow, whereas died means to cease living.

So, they were killed in/by a plane crash, but also died as a result of the plane crash.

I will say, however, when I read the subject I was a bit troubled thinking they were put to death by man's hand, rather than through an accident.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 09:23 AM
link   
My apologies, as I didn't intend any confusion or sensationalism.

I guess I have been watching Fox a little too much, maybe.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 09:25 AM
link   
I'm a little surprised to see such sympathy for the Viet-Cong from an American.
I sympathize with them also but my views are a little different than some of the other people here.



The veterans, including 14 women, were aged 60-70 and had fought for Vietnam's independence against the French and the Americans, he said. They were all from one neighborhood in Hanoi.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   
I think that the fact we didn't really hear anything about the 30-year anniversary in our media was almost enough reason to put this article up. It seems to me the U.S. hardly acknowledges the war anymore. Obviously we are not proud of it, and I don't believe the fact these were not U.S. soldiers takes anything away from the level of tragedy.

I was not alive during the Vietnam war, and what I know about the social climate at the time only comes from reading and hearing stories. It is my impression that the majority of Americans during the war wished we weren't there (maybe I'm wrong, and the hippies were just louder than the majority). So did these people. I'm sure revisiting these memories was not exactly a vacation for these people, and the fact it ended in tragedy is not diminished by the cause they fought for.

Anyway, I'm not trying to take anything away from the American soldiers that fought in the Vietnam war, nor am I trying to propogate the Viet-Cong. Just a sad situation that I wanted to share.

edit: spelling/grammer

[edit on 21-4-2005 by cohiba]



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Well any mention of Vietnam is poison to the triumphalism of the neo-Fascist US Right. The US lost, but it's an article of faith that the US is invincible, so it ought not to be discussed.

If it must be discussed, it must be framed in the context of rooting out "traitors" (anyone who disagrees with anything the .gov does, from a fascist POV) - "we did not lose in Vietnam, we were subverted by traitors!" The filthy liberals, the enemy within. "We won every battle!" We only lost in Vietnam because the dirty hippies undercut us from within, and because we lacked the "will" to slaughter enough innocents, the courage and perserverence of the Vietnamese people had nothing to do with it.

Much like Hitler rose to power partly by claiming Germany only lost WW1 because it was subverted from within by the Jews. Fascist thinking is remarkably consistent, I'll give them that.

The only difference it that todays fascists deny they are fascists, they call themselves "conservative", despite the fact that their worship of the State and it's military power is directly othogonal to traditional conservatism, which regards the State as a necessary evil whose power must be limited and whose actitivities constantly monitored as a threat to liberty.



[edit on 21-4-2005 by xmotex]



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I'm surprised there has been this many responses without someone claiming that the CIA cut the brake lines on the bus or something along those lines.

If no CIA link, then maybe a Reptilian one???



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13
I'm surprised there has been this many responses without someone claiming that the CIA cut the brake lines on the bus or something along those lines.

If no CIA link, then maybe a Reptilian one???


Well, everyone knows that Bush Jr and Sr had a father-son day and played 'drain the engine lubricant'



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
Well any mention of Vietnam is poison to the triumphalism of the neo-Fascist US Right. The US lost, but it's an article of faith that the US is invincible, so it ought not to be discussed.

If it must be discussed, it must be framed in the context of rooting out "traitors" (anyone who disagrees with anything the .gov does, from a fascist POV) - "we did not lose in Vietnam, we were subverted by traitors!" The filthy liberals, the enemy within. "We won every battle!" We only lost in Vietnam because the dirty hippies undercut us from within, and because we lacked the "will" to slaughter enough innocents, the courage and perserverence of the Vietnamese people had nothing to do with it.

Much like Hitler rose to power partly by claiming Germany only lost WW1 because it was subverted from within by the Jews. Fascist thinking is remarkably consistent, I'll give them that.

The only difference it that todays fascists deny they are fascists, they call themselves "conservative", despite the fact that their worship of the State and it's military power is directly othogonal to traditional conservatism, which regards the State as a necessary evil whose power must be limited and whose actitivities constantly monitored as a threat to liberty.



[edit on 21-4-2005 by xmotex]



Ummm.... I'll smoke some of what he's having!



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join