Obama says Vietnam veterans too often 'denigrated'

When thousands of veterans has lost their lives,handicapped, family shattered by violences/divorces across the 52 states, those warmongers like Bush, Cheney,Rumsfled...etc. were enjoying their lives in their ranches!

Somebody slap Obama. America jumping into the Vietnam War was the national shame, not the treatment of the veterans, most of whom volunteered, the very men who made that national shame possible.

President Barack Obama paid tribute Monday to the men and women who have died defending America

Precious few, if any soldiers have died defending America since WWII. All wars after that were about U.S. interests abroad or hunting down enemies and suspects. Vietnam was sure as HELLFIRE, not about defending America. The only claim to honor Vietnam Vets have would be a feeling that they wanted to defend South Vietnam, in which case, they should have joined THEIR military.

And defending South Vietnam was in itself a grave mistake that just got more people killed. So not much honor in that either.

The only Vietnam Vets I have respect for are those who are ardently anti-war in the present. Same with veterans of Afghanistan and Iraq II. The rest I would speak my mind about except I think my post would face deletion.

American involvement in Indochina was one of the great tragedies of the 20th century; it could so easily have been avoided with deeper historical understanding. Still, casting judgement on those who made decisions based on the mindset of the time through the 20/20 vision of history is harsh beyond acceptance. The leaders of the time should be criticized for what they failed to understand; the protesters praised for what they were able to realized, and those who were put through the meat grinder admired, not at least for the fortitude and courage they showed.

Great. Now if Obama could just get Sen John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, to say the same thing.

Romney: "the nation must have the world's strongest military to win wars and prevent them"

Amazing how the U.S. had the world's strongest military but was unable to prevent the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Still, casting judgement on those who made decisions based on the mindset of the time through the 20/20 vision of history is harsh beyond acceptance.

So you think the Gulf of Tonkin incident was legit then?

A great many people refused to serve in Vietnam. It was hardly a fringe concept that Vietnam was totally wrong on practically all levels, even at the time. Americans knew better, and those who didn't quite simply had their heads up their butts...and that is never excuseable. Then we have those who knew better but went along for selfish reasons...that's not acceptable either.

It makes me sad to see you Laguna, of all people here, to offer any apologist statements on U.S. involvement in the Vietnam war.

Obama only cares about the veterans at the moment as he has an election to win. He didn't even MAKE it to Memorial day 2010 because he was too busy vacationing in Chicago. He let Biden take care of that speech. Obama has no feelings for anyone in the military and never will. Proven a multitude of time over. Then again that's why liberals love him...

Gotta disagree with Obama, in part, on this one. NO ONE in the Vietnam war was defending the US, until the US decided to up and invade. And the US lost that war, and so has the US mainland suffered as a result? No. It's a shame that so many nations were turned into north/south halves of nations after WWII and Russia and the US dividing them, but the actual shame was starting the Vietnam war to begin with. Where I DO agree with Obama is that the men and women who served over there should not suffer for the nation's wrong-doings.

smithinjapan

Gotta disagree with Obama, in part, on this one. NO ONE in the Vietnam war was defending the US, until the US decided to up and invade.

Smith, l have to disagree with you on this one. Were any US veterans from WW1 defending the US? Where US veterans from Korea defending the US? Where US veterans from Panama, Haiti, Grenada, or Iraq defending the US? In any of these conflicts was the US under threat? Nope, so what makes them and their veterans immune from the types of attacks that the Vietnam Vets received when they got home. These people got attacked because of their governments choices.

valued_customer

Somebody slap Obama. America jumping into the Vietnam War was the national shame, not the treatment of the veterans, most of whom volunteered, the very men who made that national shame possible.

Really! You do realise that of all the troops that served in Vietnam 1/3 were drafted. So l dont know how you come at the statement MOST when 1 in every 3 was a draftee. And regardless of whether they were drafted or volunteered these people deserve not only respect but better treatment than what they received by the public. Ok you may be opposed to the war, but why blame the people fighting it. Blame the government and the establishment that sent them there not the ones that are sent there. That is the backward way of doing things. Another thing is do you also realise that quite a number of those that volunteered also did it to avoid the draft. By volunteering they had more of a chance of getting into non combat areas in the military. Regardless of how you feel you should not blame the veterans for what they where ordered to do, blame the military, blame the government but do not blame the poor people sent to do the dirty work.

Vietnam was sure as HELLFIRE, not about defending America. The only claim to honor Vietnam Vets have would be a feeling that they wanted to defend South Vietnam, in which case, they should have joined THEIR military.

Was WW1 about defending the US, was Korea, was any other conflict since? Infact was WW2 even about defending America? If the US had sued for peace after Pearl Harbor would any part of the US been lost? Yet veterans from all these conflicts where treated better than Vietnam Vets. And that is the disgrace of it, sure Vietnam was about defending Vietnam, just as Korea was about defending Korea, Iraq was about defending Kuwait then ousting a dictator, WW1 was about defending France. Yet all these vets are respected and honored and l dont here you bad mouthing them. Maybe the US troops should have joined the Korean military or the French military in WW1, how do you stand on that?

And defending South Vietnam was in itself a grave mistake that just got more people killed. So not much honor in that either.

In your opinion!

The only Vietnam Vets I have respect for are those who are ardently anti-war in the present. Same with veterans of Afghanistan and Iraq II. The rest I would speak my mind about except I think my post would face deletion.

See thats the big difference between you and me. I respect ALL the vets regardless, whether they volunteered, where drafted, are anti or pro war. You know why? They are not to blame for the conflict, the ones l blame are the government and the military establishment not the poor guy under orders to do this or that. I guess that is a hard one to grasp though.

Cletus agree with you on this issue. My guy is an Iraq war vet went over when his unit was called up. He is my hero, he only wanted to serve our country.

so what makes them and their veterans immune from the types of attacks that the Vietnam Vets received when they got home.

WWI vets were defending long established nations. Plus the Germans did attack American ship.ping.

In Vietnam the U.S. got involved in a civil war. In Korea the operation was U.N. led rather than a more or less unilateral American action.

Really! You do realise that of all the troops that served in Vietnam 1/3 were drafted.

Is 2/3 most? Yeah it is. That is why I said most volunteered. Things like this will clear up when you stop wasting your brain power trying to defend the indefensible.

valued_customer

"so what makes them and their veterans immune from the types of attacks that the Vietnam Vets received when they got home." WWI vets were defending long established nations. Plus the Germans did attack American ships

MMM defending long term established nations hey... Your statement and justification for treating Vietnam vets badly was and l quote

"Vietnam was sure as ......., not about defending America. The only claim to honor Vietnam Vets have would be a feeling that they wanted to defend South Vietnam, in which case, they should have joined THEIR military."

So please tell me exactly were the threat to the US was in WW1? You used this statement as your reasoning for attacks on war veterans now l would like to hear you back it up.

As for your statement that the Germans where attacking your ships. You lost a whole 7 merchant ships prior to your entry. Other nations lost even more but didnt enter the war.

This coming from a guy who prior to holding political office saw nothing wrong with mingling with people who engaged in violence in this country against other Americans in opposition to the Vietnam War.

Sorry, Obama. But vets of that conflict like myself will never buy into your crocodile tears for us.

RR

When thousands of veterans has lost their lives,handicapped, family shattered by violences/divorces across the 52 states, those warmongers like Bush, Cheney,Rumsfled...etc. were enjoying their lives in their ranches!

@ just-a-bigguy: There are only 50 states, not 52. Also, "W" did at least get some pull and wound up flying fighters in the Air National Guard. Bill Clinton has the opportunity to do, but he got out of it, so does he get included in your criticism?

As for your statement that the Germans where attacking your ships. You lost a whole 7 merchant ships prior to your entry. Other nations lost even more but didnt enter the war.

Actually, we didn't go to war in WWI after the Lusitania was sunk, but after the "Zimmerman" telegraph was intercepted. This was a telegraph from Germany to Mexico that stated if they joined the war on Germany's side, when they won they would get back the lands they lost to the US/Mexico war in the 1840's. Remember, the commander of the military forces, Gen "Blackjack" Pershing, gained fame on the Tex/Mex border hunting Pancho Villa. So there was a reason why the US joine WWI, and not to just prop up European nations.

Alphaape

Actually, we didn't go to war in WWI after the Lusitania was sunk, but after the "Zimmerman" telegraph was intercepted. This was a telegraph from Germany to Mexico that stated if they joined the war on Germany's side, when they won they would get back the lands they lost to the US/Mexico war in the 1840's. Remember, the commander of the military forces, Gen "Blackjack" Pershing, gained fame on the Tex/Mex border hunting Pancho Villa. So there was a reason why the US joine WWI, and not to just prop up European nations.

Um the Mexicans had already rejected the message by the time the US entered the war. So my question to the poster is still where was the threat. He claimed that his justification for treating war veterans poorly is that it wasnt the US's war and they shouldnt have been there. Funny when shown other examples the poster remains very quiet, l guess he just has an issue with Vietnam vets and cant handle a few facts. Pity that his attitude about an event is aimed at the people who took part rather than the people who created the issue.

“As long as I’m president, we will make sure you and your loved ones will receive the benefits you’ve earned"

Meanwhile, this administration continues to look at ways to reduce military benefits and rewrite retirement programs. In the time honored tradition of the federal government that's run by a democrat, the Obama administration intends to seek spending cuts on the backs of veterans.

Obama's actions speaks much louder than his words.

RR

Your statement and justification for treating Vietnam vets badly was and l quote

Don't cherry-pick Cletus. I also said they should have joined the South Vietnamese army if they wanted to defend South Vietnam. The core problem is my government getting involved in civil wars, not for the purpose of defending justice, but for the purpose of defending interests. Individuals can get involved all they want, as individuals. But I would still criticize them for joining the more corrupt side.

So please tell me exactly were the threat to the US was in WW1?

I already mentioned ship.ing and that was plenty as Germany decided to go back to all out with submarine warfare on our ships heading to Britian in 1917. But if that is not enough for you, there was the Zimmerman Telegram. Nothing like that at all in Vietnam except the totally staged Gulf of Tonkin incident.

Other nations lost even more but didnt enter the war.

They did what they thought best. I agree with the American decision to enter WWI, just as I agree with initial reluctance to join. Sadly, the non-intervention spirit of America has been completely lost, and Vietnam was clear proof of that.

valued_customer

Don't cherry-pick Cletus.

Whose cherry picking? I merely used a statement you made. A statement that could actually sum up ANY war the US has been involved in during the past 100 odd years. Yet you seem to focus purely on the Vietnam conflict while your statement actually covers just about all their wars. So what is it you have against Vietnam vets? The second gulf war occurred with no direct threat to the US, those soldiers where all volunteers do you hate them as well?

I also said they should have joined the South Vietnamese army if they wanted to defend South Vietnam.

And as l pointed out, the same could apply to WW1, Korea, Granada, Gulf war, Panama, Somalia, Afghanistan, etc etc etc. Why on your theory the US doesnt need a military all those eager young people can merely go and join the military of whatever country is at war, isnt that what your saying.

The core problem is my government getting involved in civil wars, not for the purpose of defending justice, but for the purpose of defending interests.

We actually agree here 100%, but rather than blame the individual l blame the government who sends the individual there and the military as an organisation.

Individuals can get involved all they want, as individuals. But I would still criticize them for joining the more corrupt side.

OMG you really have no clue do you. Do you think they join for fun? The military personal are sent where they are told to do what they are told. In the case of Vietnam vets do you differentiate in your hatred between volunteers and draftees? Because in your theory you should, one group volunteered to serve the other was essentially forced. Big difference.....

I already mentioned ship.ing and that was plenty as Germany decided to go back to all out with submarine warfare on our ships heading to Britian in 1917.

Ah ships, yes you lost a whole 7 prior to your entry. And the ships sunk where all carrying munitions.... MMM as a neutral country isnt that a big no no!!!!

But if that is not enough for you, there was the Zimmerman Telegram.

Which was declined by the Mexicans PRIOR to your entry into the war...... So its relevance?

Nothing like that at all in Vietnam except the totally staged Gulf of Tonkin incident.

No just one nation attacking another nation with the sole purpose of forcing reunification by force. Wow sounds just like Korea hey. But you support those guys.

They did what they thought best. I agree with the American decision to enter WWI, just as I agree with initial reluctance to join. Sadly, the non-intervention spirit of America has been completely lost, and Vietnam was clear proof of that.

Im sorry but non intervention was not lost in Vietnam. It was lost the moment you entered WW1 and most agree with that. Your nation proved itself a world power and it kept wanting more and more.

But regardless of all this, it is dispicable to blame the guy on the ground for the politicians decision. Take for example Afghanistan, l hate this conflict, l hate the principle and idea behind it and think it is a waste of lives and money. But l 100% support my nations troops fighting there and always will as they are doing the job they are told to by government. My issue is with the government not the men and women doing as they are told.

The core problem is my government getting involved in civil wars, not for the purpose of defending justice, but for the purpose of defending interests.

The core problem was Russia getting involved in civil wars, not for the purpose of defending justice, but for the purpose of defending communist expansion and interests. Our interests was in blunting Soviet expansion and their interest was expanding communism, they armed the North and fought as their proxies We weren't able to turn the communist tide in Vietnam and went on to sweep the region since we left. It's to bad we weren't able as the region then had human suffering on a scale that was nothing short of a genocide as a result. Pol Pot and Cambodia's killing fields...... 2 million dead, and Vietnam's socialist re-education camps for the enemies of the state are the result of us leaving. The injustice that was inflicted by the victors on the people they "liberated" is and was appalling.

Pol Pot and Cambodia's killing fields...... 2 million dead, and Vietnam's socialist re-education camps for the enemies of the state are the result of us leaving. The injustice that was inflicted by the victors on the people they "liberated" is and was appalling.

@ sailwind: Well said!

Man I get sick of gutless pimps like Obama, Biden and Kristol talking to troops like they are their friends. What nonsense - havent we grown up yet? Dont we see that these politicians are sending what is left of Americas once-great working class to die in the desert for their corporate slumlords?

Forget all this history revision you guys are trying to peddle and worry about the here and now. Loathsome crap.

America is struggling to keep its head above water and the crippled troops are a symbol of what a once great nation has become.

It's just Obama trying for the votes of people who served in a war that his democrats started.

romney has a 28 point lead among veterans.

I'm a vet and I'm not voting for Romney. He's from the same party that glorifies Geroge W. Bush - the orchestrator of the Iraq War. We'd be DONE with Afghanistan by now if Bush hadn't decided to start a war of his own. How many have died (on BOTH sides) for those phantom "Weapons of Mass Destruction" supposedly held by Iraq? Romney has YET to repudiate that war. Republicans are scum.