Anyone at the march at the Capitol?

[samclem]

Re: "Was there a pro-war march?"

There was a small counter demonstration on Constitution Avenue across from the Capitol. Just a handful of people. I can't blame pro-war people for not coming out. I joined a small counter demonstration at a pro-war Billy Graham rally at McCormick Place in Chicago in 1969 or thereabouts -- it was not a fun experience and probably did no good. Joining in with fellow travelers is a lot more comfortable.

I probably didn't comunicate very well. The point I was trying to make is that there was surely no pro-war rally. No sane person thinks war, for it's own sake, is something that should be favored. Kinda like abortion: whatever side you take on the "pro-life" vs "pro-choice" debate, virtually no one is "pro-abortion" (believing that abortion is, in itself a "good thing"). Those who support the present policy in Iraq believe that it is better than the alternative, just as those who favor abortion believe legalized abortion is better than the alternative.

Jane Fonda--She should pipe up long and loud. Since it is fashionable in some circles to draw parallels between the present fight in Iraq and our involvement in Vietnam, I think it is entirely appropriate that she, and all she stood and stands for, be on clear display for all to see. To complete the picture, I only wish others could be there to lend their voices. I wish we could hear from the 1.7 million Cambodians slaughtered in the aftermath of our departure. Or the thousands of Montagnards and those who stood by us in the ARVN and the Republic of South Vietnam who were executed after we left. They believed in the United States. We didn't even continue to provide the promised materal support after we left. These souls could give needed testimony to what "quitting the fight" can cost. Millions of lives destroyed. Jane Fonda "saved lives" --an "amazing" observation, but the tragedy of actual events robs it of all humor such irony would normally convey. Oh, there's no doubt America felt better after we left Vietnam- - "Hey, it's not on the evening news anymore, what a relief! How are the Cubs doing?"

I hope Jane is featured prominently in the movement to quit Iraq. Her mere presence will serve as an invaluable reminder that actions have consequences. Those proposing an action have a duty to consider and present the consequences. That's the number one (and, I believe, the most damning and accurate) critique of President Bush--"he started a war without considering the consequences." I do think the credibility of those proposing that we abandon the present Iraqi government and security framework would be improved if these individuals would heed their own call for a full consideration of future impacts before recommending a course of action.

 

[laurence]

samclem, I often don't agree with your posts. But I wanted to make a point of stating I find this post very thoughtful and well composed.

I am uncomfortable with Jane Fonda's involvement with the current anti-war movement because as someone who believes this war was a mistake, I don't want a celebrity idiot traitor giving the cause a bad name and distracting people from the greater issues. Her actions cannot be excused, but we would not have won that war had she not posed on that AA gun.

 

[donheff]

I think the greatest parallel between Viet Nam and Iraq is that we should not have gone to war in either country. The second was that both involved an ill conceived, wrongly executed plan. Samclem is correct that the consequences are on our heads. We truly abandoned the Vietnamese, I hope we don't do the same to the Iraqis. But that does not mean we should continue the war. There will be a bloody aftermath and we are morally obligated to help alleviate it as best we can and to help rebuild when things settle down. I suspect we will do neither - the increasing volume of our blame the victim rhetoric is a harbinger of that.

 

[bosco]

That photo tells it all. Scum sucking pig.

She was and is a traitor, IMHO. When she dies, send me the video. That's one film of hers that I'll buy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Fonda

thanks for the link. I actually read the "Hanoi Jane" part. Although I've never agreed with a lot of what she did when she want over there (IMO she was a dupe and was manipulated), don't you find it interesting that she exposed the US policy of bombing Vietnamese dikes? Evidently, even the administration had to back off after video evidence was produced. Shut George H.W. Bush right up.

So what's worse--what she did or bombing the dikes, killing civilians, and then covering up and lying about it?

Your position is that exposing vile lies by your government makes you a traitor?

 

[brewer12345]

thanks for the link. I actually read the "Hanoi Jane" part. Although I've never agreed with a lot of what she did when she want over there (IMO she was a dupe and was manipulated), don't you find it interesting that she exposed the US policy of bombing Vietnamese dikes? Evidently, even the administration had to back off after video evidence was produced. Shut George H.W. Bush right up.

So what's worse--what she did or bombing the dikes, killing civilians, and then covering up and lying about it?

Your position is that exposing vile lies by your government makes you a traitor?

Why would the US want to bomb Vietnamese lesbians?

Seriously, I guess I can understand the visceral reaction of the vets of that era to Fonda, but it really seems like she made a questionable decision in the midst of an effort that was largely successful in showing up the reprehensible things the US was doing. Did she do some dumb things? Yep. Traitor? Please.

In reading the wiki thing, I was really struck by the similarities between the Iraq mess and the Viet Nam war. Many of the same cast of characters, even. I know that the chimp wasn't a good student, but didn't we learn anything?

 

[REWahoo]

Seriously, I guess I can understand the visceral reaction of the vets of that era to Fonda, but...

Brewer, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this one.

Unless you had a son, husband, brother, other relative, friend or fellow aircrew member involved in combat in Vietnam at the time, you cannot truly understand the feeling of betrayal by the vets of that era to the actions of Miss Fonda.

I'm not trying to pick a fight or to argue we were right or wrong to be involved in that war. I'm only making the point that some things have to be experienced to be fully understood.

 

[brewer12345]

I'm not trying to pick a fight or to argue we were right or wrong to be involved in that war. I'm only making the point that some things have to be experienced to be fully understood.

Like I said, "I guess I can understand..." Intended to mean that I think I can at least fathom why vets might be instantly enraged by even the mention of her name. That sort of reaction happens, but it doesn't exactly spawn dispassionate analysis of the past.

Personally, if I had been around and of draftable age around then, better than even odds I would be ending my sentences with "eh" these days. So I cannot claim any special insight into the views of those who were willing to go.

 

[laurence]

It's like a white person giving a speech at the NAACP at dropping the "N" bomb. It really doesn't matter if he or she made excellent points in the speech or if every other word was true and could be backed up with data. He/She has made themselves persona non grata for such a large portion of the populace, their presence going forward will drown out any rational debate on the issue.

 

[Jarhead*]

Personally, if I had been around and of draftable age around then, better than even odds I would be ending my sentences with "eh" these days. So I cannot claim any special insight into the views of those who were willing to go.

That seals the deal for me. Absolutely, without doubt, so help me God, I'll never post anything on this board again re: Politics, or Military.

 

[brewer12345]

That seals the deal for me. Absolutely, without doubt, so help me God, I'll never post anything on this board again re: Politics, or Military.

Would that I could stick to the same rule, JH.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Didnt the vietnamese engagement (along with a few other over-extensions) lead, in part, to the financial collapse of the soviet union?

I remember reading a pretty well thought out paper that claimed that a lot of these situations were put in place and continued to over extend the FSU's precarious economy.

If theres any truth to that (and gee, it seems to have worked out that way) then perhaps these historic 'meaningless' wars may have averted an eventual face off between the two superpowers. Which might have been far more costly.

In fact, another of our alleged orchestrations in this vein has in part led to the iraqi situation. Our puppet, the shah of iran, was propped up in part to fight the soviet influenced area states like iraq and force them to expend more resources than they'd have liked. Our influence in iran was a major cause of the islamic revolution there.

Doesnt it seem like everything we touch turns to **** but over time it all seems to work out?

Whats that saying about drunks, fools and the united states of america?

What was really a boatload of fun was going back 2-3 years and reading all the iraqi war threads here. The folks who all but stated what has happened would happen; the folks who steadfastly assured them that this would not be the case; contrasting the posts people made then vs what they're saying now.

Real interesting stuff.

 

[laurence]

I thought it was the USSR's involvement in Afghanistan, along with Chernobyl that tipped them over the brink. I saw a special that documented how many different ways Russia was hurt by the nuclear meltdown. For example, they lost just about every experienced pilot due to flyovers to close to the site (they all cooked over the next few weeks). While they tried to limit the amount of time regular soldiers spent there, shoveling and covering the meltdown, the senior officers spent too much time there. Their best engineers had to tunnel in from the side to entinguish the fire because it was melting through the bedrock and threatened to poision the water table for about a third of the Soviet people. They succeeded, but paid heavily for the exposure.

The conservatives at my work are already blaming the press and the liberals for the loss of this war. "If we just sent more troops, just a little longer, stay the course, don't lose your will, we'll show them we have the stomache for losses" etc.

 

[youbet]

What was that old line from SNL? "Jane, you ignorant slut!"?

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Well, that was the focus of the stuff I was reading...that the "downfall" didnt just happen all at once...it was a 30-35 year protracted economic 'battle' between the FSU and the US, and they were forced to try to match our spending when their core economy simply couldnt do it. It started with cuba and vietnam and proceeded downhill from there.

The biggest alleged speedbump was reagans "star wars" proposal which in essence told them "nice job building all those trillions in bombers and missiles, at the expense of feeding your people. Now with a little technology we might be able to knock it all out of the sky". Widely viewed as a stupid suggestion from a leader a little light in the brain area, its now looked at as a real tripping point.

The crap in afghanistan and the chechnya situation just finished them off. Hadnt really ever read much on the full impact of chernobyl but now I will. Thanks. My afternoon is now well accounted for.

We wont "win" the war in iraq, at least not in the traditional sense, and nobody with half a brain in their head and a decent education in regional politics would ever think there was a chance. Like all the past conquerors, we'll leave and things will go back to the way they've always been. Hopefully.

 

[Nords]

Unless you had a son, husband, brother, other relative, friend or fellow aircrew member involved in combat in Vietnam at the time, you cannot truly understand the feeling of betrayal by the vets of that era to the actions of Miss Fonda.

25+ years ago at USNA we spent a lot of time with former POWs-- VADM Lawrence, VADM Stockdale and Paul Galanti were regulars.

You didn't want to bring Jane's name into any situation. Nor Robert McNamara's.

 

[brewer12345]

Well, that was the focus of the stuff I was reading...that the "downfall" didnt just happen all at once...it was a 30-35 year protracted economic 'battle' between the FSU and the US, and they were forced to try to match our spending when their core economy simply couldnt do it. It started with cuba and vietnam and proceeded downhill from there.

Maybe, or maybe it was just that their inefficient and chronically poorly run economy finally collapsed under its own weight. That's the hard part about macroeconomics: it is almost impossible to prove anything.

Old (bad) joke: Three econometricians go hunting. They see a deer. The first one shoots and misses by a meter to the left. The second shoots and misses by a yard to the right. The third drops his rifle and shouts "we got it, we got it!"

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

True, the cause and effects are all but impossible to measure, and theres a certain degree of advantage to whom is writing the "history" book.

 

[laurence]

CFB, definitely think it was a cumulative effect as well.

Your comment on who writes the history books sparks a tangent, I love reading the "history"/propaganda of "the other side", like news reports from inside the Third Reich. Always makes for interesting reading!

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Isnt that great fun? I've occasionally dipped into historic material from a number of other countries, written at various times. Some of the japanese and german stuff is really interesting, reading it from their perspective.

Really interesting to read some of the material describing the emerging US from other countries perspectives.

Truth IS variable.

 

[brewer12345]

I actually read AFP news stories for a non-US perspective.

 

[laurence]

BBC and NPR are my principle sources, I haven't made the time to branch out.

 

[Eagle43]

thanks for the link. I actually read the "Hanoi Jane" part. Although I've never agreed with a lot of what she did when she want over there (IMO she was a dupe and was manipulated), don't you find it interesting that she exposed the US policy of bombing Vietnamese dikes? Evidently, even the administration had to back off after video evidence was produced. Shut George H.W. Bush right up.

So what's worse--what she did or bombing the dikes, killing civilians, and then covering up and lying about it?

Your position is that exposing vile lies by your government makes you a traitor?

If you give aid and comfort to the enemy in the enemy's country,with your countrymen being tortured, yes you are a traitor and should be executed.

http://www.snopes.com/military/fonda.asp

 

[bosco]

If you give aid and comfort to the enemy in the enemy's country,with your countrymen being tortured, yes you are a traitor and should be executed.

Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavour.

1) Vietnam was not invading and attempting to overthrow the US. The US was invading and attempting to overthrow Vietnam.

2) the war was not an official war--it was authorized by a lie (sound familiar?)called the Gulf of Tonkin resolution

I am not defending Jane Fonda's conduct wrt to the POWs. I think it is reprehensible. But we are walking a very fine line here. The war in Vietnam was wrong, immoral, and genocidal. The conduct of the US was in many ways far worse than anything Jane Fonda did. Hatred of Jane Fonda the individual, IMO, is a way of not facing up to what was done as a nation.

And yes, I would have skittered back to Canada in a heartbeat rather than participate in that war (being fortunate to have had dual citizenship at the time). Too bad if it offends Jarhead and others. Instead, I stayed in the US over that period and marched in the streets, sat in on draft boards, and sued the FBI for photographing me at a demonstration.

If that makes me a traitor, then so be it.

 

[samclem]

Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavour.

Fonda's actions clearly fit Oran's criteria for treason: She helped a foreign government make war against the United States. Oran doesn't indicate that an individual's own judgements about the practicality or morality of the war are in any way signficant. And, they aren't. Note that, according to the definition, all an individual would need to do to avaoid charges of treason s to renounce his/her citizenship. A Canadian or Swiss citizen doing what Jane did would not be a traitor (though they could still be wrong) If Fonda had renounced her US citizenship beforehand, her actions would have been les dishonoroble.

It was clear that Fonda's actions went well beyond urging the US to pull out of the war. She wanted the North to win, and took actions within her power to achieve that (the Snopes link previously provided gives a fairly evenhanded account of what she did). You are right in that the "bar" we set for treason must be high: Those working within the US to affect the policies of our government, even if these actions result in miltary defeat and huge undesirable consequences, are not traitors But, when an individual seeks to directly aid the enemies of his nation during a time of miltary conflict, that person has committed treason. Period.

Jane Fonda: American Traitor B*tch

 

[Alex]

Hanoi Jane is now "JIHAD JANE".