Oppressing fundamentalists

[willyd]

A friend of mine told me that history has shown when any government ignores a fundamentalist group, it eventally dies out, but when they try to openly fight a fundamentalist group it grows stronger.

Is this true? He never gave me any examples?

 

[KoreBolteR]

i guess it is, since as soon as america and allies attacked taliban, the taliban recriuted more members, THANKS to al-jazeera television news network...

 

[Neutrino]

I would say there is some truth to that. As KoreBolteR pointed out, Al Queda is stronger toda then it ever was before 9/11. People tend to gather in the face of opposition and ignore differences that would normally tear them apart.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Not true completely. The Nazi party was a radical fringe group at one time. Keeping Adolf in complete check and tougher penalties than a small prison term for his activites and openly fighting them when they had become violent (Reichstag burning, etc) could've early stopped them

 

[willyd]

Not true completely. The Nazi party was a radical fringe group at one time. Keeping Adolf in complete check and tougher penalties than a small prison term for his activites and openly fighting them when they had become violent (Reichstag burning, etc) could've early stopped them

ooh good point there
you get a muffin

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Could also look at the Bolshevik's ramblings and little effective action taken by the Romanov's before the Red Revolution and USSR formation.

 

[Kangy]

i guess it is, since as soon as america and allies attacked taliban, the taliban recriuted more members, THANKS to al-jazeera television news network...

The hell?

It wasn't because of Al Jazeera at all, we've been over this before. People there saw it as an attack against them, and their religion as a whole, which made for easy targets when they were recruited. Al Jazeera have and will never say "fight the American pig-dogs and join with terrorists". Bush would put them all in Guantanamo.

 

[Eg.]

if they hendle ot right, a government can get rid of a violent fundamentalist group quite easily. all u have to do is whatch them to see when they are having large meetings, chapter wise, and then arrest them all. hound down the last remainders, and put them in segregated prisons so they can only talk to themselves

really just getting rid of them as many as possible would work too

 

[el Chi]

Could also look at the Bolshevik's ramblings and little effective action taken by the Romanov's before the Red Revolution and USSR formation.

Well not entirely. The Bolsheviks were a group that split off from Russia's main Socialist political party at the time, leaving two parties, the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks were more Communist and more proactive, shall we say, than the Mensheviks (part of the reason for the split if I remember correctly). The country was very unstable anyway and I'm not sure if keeping them in check would have helped all that much.
That said, I don't believe that if you ignore a problem like a radical potentially violent fringe group it'll just go away.

Kangy - thank Christ you put KoreBolter right. I was about to launch into another tirade.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Al Jazeera have and will never say "fight the American pig-dogs and join with terrorists". Bush would put them all in Guantanamo.

Not before they flew a plane into the White House of course.

 

[el Chi]

Which was sort of allowed to happen because the government didn't properly act on intelligence they'd collected.
So I suppose that basically proves that the statement that started this thread - ignore it and it'll go away, essentially - is utter nonsense.

 

[KoreBolteR]

The hell?

It wasn't because of Al Jazeera at all, we've been over this before. People there saw it as an attack against them, and their religion as a whole, which made for easy targets when they were recruited. Al Jazeera have and will never say "fight the American pig-dogs and join with terrorists". Bush would put them all in Guantanamo.

look, USA and co, freed the people of iraq (the people have sectretly told the media.....

all iraqis are scared of is the terrorist, and the only thing the terrorists can rely on is Al-Jazeera news network brainwashing people to join them. and not forgetting , other al-qaeda/terrorist recruiters roaming the streets. lol

 

[el Chi]

Ok, you do realise that the violence in Iraq isn't being caused really by al-Qaeda or proper terrorists, as such. They're dissidents - they're pissed off that this foreign force has waltzed into their country and statrted to run things because they think they know best. I'm not saying they're right, and I'm certainly not saying that their violence is justified. However, imagine if some foreign force invaded the UK. Would you lie back and accept it?

 

[Scoobnfl]

i guess it is, since as soon as america and allies attacked taliban, the taliban recriuted more members, THANKS to al-jazeera television news network...

not true.

look at the KKK, which in the early part of the 1900's had an estimated membership of 300-500,000 members. The federal govt. began confronting them at nearly every opportunity and exposed the hate and evil that they tried to hide behind an image of christian values . This systematic and sustained effort has led to their membership being reducued to several thousand, virtually all of which are scumbag trailer park type mentalities with less credibility than a pile of dogshit.

It took several decades of sustained effort to combat and expose the KKK for what it truly is, and that is what it takes to confront an organization like that, simply ignoring them or wishing that they would go away or play nice will accomplish nothing.

 

[Scoobnfl]

Ok, you do realise that the violence in Iraq isn't being caused really by al-Qaeda or proper terrorists, as such. They're dissidents - they're pissed off that this foreign force has waltzed into their country and statrted to run things because they think they know best. I'm not saying they're right, and I'm certainly not saying that their violence is justified. However, imagine if some foreign force invaded the UK. Would you lie back and accept it?

Not true at all. Most of the trouble makers in Iraq are foreign fighters, streaming in from Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria and Jordan. There are also Chechens, Uzbekis', Yemenis etc........ they are the trouble makers that are causing virtually all of the problems. The real tragedy is that the Iraqis will not stand up to them and help expose and irradicate them. I guess this is in part because of the reports they read daily in the western newspapers that feverishly beg for departure from Iraq, and seem to do nothing but paint a terrible and bleek outlook for them.

Lieberal western media condeming people to death through their own namby pamby pens.

 

[Vulture]

i guess it is, since as soon as america and allies attacked taliban, the taliban recriuted more members, THANKS to al-jazeera television news network...

That is incorrect, Al Jazeera is simply the 'Fox News' of the Middle East, I used to live there.

Secondly, the Taliban (Originally the Soviet-Fighting, CIA-Funded Mujahadeen) aquired a large number of recruits after being attacked becuase of all of the angry men left after the attacks.

Ok, you do realise that the violence in Iraq isn't being caused really by al-Qaeda or proper terrorists, as such. They're dissidents - they're pissed off that this foreign force has waltzed into their country and statrted to run things because they think they know best. I'm not saying they're right, and I'm certainly not saying that their violence is justified. However, imagine if some foreign force invaded the UK. Would you lie back and accept it?

Couldn't agree more.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Ok, you do realise that the violence in Iraq isn't being caused really by al-Qaeda or proper terrorists, as such. They're dissidents - they're pissed off that this foreign force has waltzed into their country and statrted to run things because they think they know best. I'm not saying they're right, and I'm certainly not saying that their violence is justified. However, imagine if some foreign force invaded the UK. Would you lie back and accept it?

Actually a sizeable portion, if not well over half even, are foreign terrorists that have infiltrated the country. The numbers are decreasing due to massive raids such as Fallujah (which destroyed their 'central command' so to speak, and scattered the remaining ones to be taken out progressively.) and also due to the Iraqi Army (ING and Army now merged) improving much at border security.

 

[Vulture]

Actually a sizeable portion, if not well over half even, are foreign terrorists that have infiltrated the country

Evidence?
Most of the Iraqis that have been interviewed say that there was no foreign people, only Iraqis. The claim that it was foreign terrorists was likely to simply be something to justify military action.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Accounts from friends back from Iraq (Was stationed in Mosul, SBCT from Ft. Lewis)

Vast number of articles on the subject

And the fact that the major image of the insurgents and terrorists, Zarqawi, is a Jordanian.

 

[Vulture]

Most of the Accounts I have heard from Iraqis suggest otherwise, somehow I find it doubtfull that half of the people fighting there are Non-Iraqis, though there are certainly some and the possibilty of a foreign entity controlling things cannot be rules out

 

[Gray Fox]

Funny how the same people that like Fox News condem Al Jazeera.
Do you really think the Iraqi's don't want the US out, has anyone forgotten the Abu Graib scandal, do you think the Iraqi's like that, do you think they like that they can't use their own seeds to grow plants.
http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=53197&highlight=seed

 

[Absinthe]

Do you really think the Iraqi's don't want the US out, has anyone forgotten the Abu Graib scandal, do you think the Iraqi's like that, do you think they like that they can't use their own seeds to grow plants.

Of course. They love it.

 

[Scoobnfl]

The hell?

It wasn't because of Al Jazeera at all, we've been over this before. People there saw it as an attack against them, and their religion as a whole, which made for easy targets when they were recruited. Al Jazeera have and will never say "fight the American pig-dogs and join with terrorists". Bush would put them all in Guantanamo.

people where? Afghanistan? Afghanistan is much better off and the population there was tired of all the Arabs and other foreign fighters that streamed into their country to get training at AQ camps etc..... and enjoy the hospitality of the lawless regime of the Taliban which was propped up by pakistani secret police and military intelligence. The Afghans saw the attack against them and it was their own islamic brothers that were doing it, brutalizing women and non muslims. that was ok with you though huh?.

Lots of the foreign fighters that we are catching and killing in Iraq are the ones that fled Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban. They fled AG because as arabs they were easier to ID and point out to coalition troops, and guess what it was the Afghans that were pointing them out to us. Why? Cuz they wanted them the fawk out of their country. That is why the situation in Afghanistan has settled so much compared to that of the situation in Iraq.

 

[burner69]

Afghanistan is better in a few respects, in general, it is screwed.

Coalition only hold a very small area in the country, and they are struggling to keep that, farmers are being forced into growing poppies for the heroin trade, and the UN named it the worst country to live in in the world (or it might have been second worst).

As for Al-Jazzera making terrorists - crap. If the UK was invaded by France do you think the bbc would air pro-France programmes? No! They just show what's happening with their own little spin on it. OK, some people might see what is happening to their country and take up arms - that's not Al-J's fault, thats Bush's fault for giving them the bombed houses and bodies to film and show.

Many of you seem stuck in the mindset that all these fighters, Iraqi or otherwise, need to be killed, and don't seem to understand that in doing this we are giving them more of a following. They will get bigger - look at terrorist figures for last year and compare them to before this "war on terror". And unless Bush can kill every single one of those darn anti-westereners (there are a lot of them, we deserve it) he's never going to win.

Which relates to the initial post, I believe.

Bye bye bush, then?

 

[CptStern]

damn scoobnfl you're so spoonfed with propaganda that even if there was evidence staring in your face you'd reject it ...once again are you sure Afghanistan is better now then before ...incidentily didnt you welcome the taliban as "freedom fighters?" even though they were radical fundamentals? Didnt members of the mujuhadeen visit washington to roaring applause in congress?

"...The Soviet forces are pitted against an extraordinary people who, in their determination to preserve the character of their ancient land, have organized an effective and still spreading country-wide resistance. The resistance of the Afghan freedom fighters is an example to all the world of the invincibility of the ideals we in this country hold most dear, the ideals of freedom and independence.
." -- Reagan, '85, praising the Afghan Mujahaddin.

Ronald Reagan speaking on Afghanistan day

 

[Scoobnfl]

damn scoobnfl you're so spoonfed with propaganda that even if there was evidence staring in your face you'd reject it ...once again are you sure Afghanistan is better now then before ...incidentily didnt you welcome the taliban as "freedom fighters?" even though they were radical fundamentals? Didnt members of the mujuhadeen visit washington to roaring applause in congress?

"...The Soviet forces are pitted against an extraordinary people who, in their determination to preserve the character of their ancient land, have organized an effective and still spreading country-wide resistance. The resistance of the Afghan freedom fighters is an example to all the world of the invincibility of the ideals we in this country hold most dear, the ideals of freedom and independence.
." -- Reagan, '85, praising the Afghan Mujahaddin.

Ronald Reagan speaking on Afghanistan day

yes Stern, Afghanistan is better off today than it was under the Taliban. Deny it all you want while you continue to ignore the evidence you claim I ignore. There is no microwave popcorn solution to the situation. The whole lot of problems that we are facing over there were created over 100 years ago, so no it will take time, and effort to solve those that can be solved and time and effort to reach amicable solutions for those that can not be solved.


I still don't see in your quote of Regan where he praises the foreign fighters, ya know the arabs like Osama, etc.......

the freedom fighters reference is to Afghans who were fighting for freedom from the soviets. Why do you have a hard time understanding that?

it was not a reference to the foreign fighters who were there fighting for the freedom to dominate the Afghan people and attempt to steal their country in hopes of establishing a bassackward Islamic republic hell bent on destroying everything non-muslim.

 

[burner69]

We helped Osama too, anyone, infact, if it helps us get to our means. F**k the consequences of the other countries.

 

[Kangy]

people where? Afghanistan? Afghanistan is much better off and the population there was tired of all the Arabs and other foreign fighters that streamed into their country to get training at AQ camps etc..... and enjoy the hospitality of the lawless regime of the Taliban which was propped up by pakistani secret police and military intelligence. The Afghans saw the attack against them and it was their own islamic brothers that were doing it, brutalizing women and non muslims. that was ok with you though huh?.

Lots of the foreign fighters that we are catching and killing in Iraq are the ones that fled Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban. They fled AG because as arabs they were easier to ID and point out to coalition troops, and guess what it was the Afghans that were pointing them out to us. Why? Cuz they wanted them the fawk out of their country. That is why the situation in Afghanistan has settled so much compared to that of the situation in Iraq.

There's one word for that: bullshit.

Muslims everywhere saw the attack on Iraq and Afghanistan as the U.S. taking the first steps in a conquest of the Middle Eastern world. The country is a shithole, and the US gives rewards to those who rat out terrorists. When you're a impoverished opium worker, you'd certainly take the reward. They don't like you being there, they don't like your attacks, just like they never liked their old government. In a lot of cases, they hate both of you.

Oh, and one other thing.

Never, ever call me a woman beater or religious fanatic. Ever. That's just making crap up to get me angry.

 

[Scoobnfl]

We helped Osama too, anyone, infact, if it helps us get to our means. F**k the consequences of the other countries.

yes we did, on a minute level as he preferred to use his own $$$ over taking ours,(status bonus amongst the jihadis) he was not our enemy then though.

we should have been able to kill him too, but the play nice Church commission made that a no no.

I hope that they bring the Salvador option into play in Iraq. That type of fighting is the only way to combat the foreign fighters and their baathist allies.

 

[burner69]

But we were aware he was hardly a nice person.

And Salvador option? What's that?

http://www.dali-gallery.com/ ???

 

[Scoobnfl]

There's one word for that: bullshit.

Muslims everywhere saw the attack on Iraq and Afghanistan as the U.S. taking the first steps in a conquest of the Middle Eastern world. The country is a shithole, and the US gives rewards to those who rat out terrorists. When you're a impoverished opium worker, you'd certainly take the reward. They don't like you being there, they don't like your attacks, just like they never liked their old government. In a lot of cases, they hate both of you.

Oh, and one other thing.

Never, ever call me a woman beater or religious fanatic. Ever. That's just making crap up to get me angry.

Did I ever accuse you of being either of those? If anything I said was taken that way then I hope you will accept my apology, as that was not my intent.

Now...............



I'll tell you what's bullshit, and that is trying to portray the attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan as attacks on Islam. Why is it the muslims only get butthurt over muslims dying when it is someone other than a muslim that is doing the killing? Muslims kill more muslims, and force muslims to live under tyranny than anyone else, and no one seems to have a problem with it. That sir is what is bullshit.

The muslim world IMHO for the most part lacks the ability to form a clear opinion on basically anything. An example of this is, 80% of Indonesians believe that the Tsunami was caused by the USA doing Nuclear tests. Another example is the whacked out Clerics that convince people that it is somehow okay to strap bombs to themselves and go into restaurants, shopping malls, etc..... and blow themselves up. Any group of people that can be convinced of doing that and believe that in doing so they will receive 72 virgins in heaven, suffers from a very large and problematic deffect. Maybe it's retardation from malnutrition or bad genes or something in the water, but whatever it is it is very much messed up.

Afghanistan is a shithole, but at least with the Taliban gone women no longer have to fear being publicly executed in the national soccer stadium for showing their faces in public. No longer do wild hordes of Arabs subject the afghans to their wahabi code of islamic rule, law etc.... Afghanistan is better today, and as long as we continue to support her she will be better in the future.

 

[Scoobnfl]

But we were aware he was hardly a nice person.

And Salvador option? What's that?

http://www.dali-gallery.com/ ???

Salvador option refers to the way we fought leftist guerillas in El Salvador and the Sandanista regime of Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua.

Basically it involves training groups of counter insurgents that will target and kill the leaders and members of the guerilla movement which we are fighting. Kneejerk lefties and media morons are quick to categorize them as "death squads" mostly because that sound bite gets more people to listen, watch, or read than does counter insurgency strike team.

that is the Salvador option in a nutshell.

 

[burner69]

The muslim world IMHO for the most part lacks the ability to form a clear opinion on basically anything. An example of this is, 80% of Indonesians believe that the Tsunami was caused by the USA doing Nuclear tests. Another example is the whacked out Clerics that convince people that it is somehow okay to strap bombs to themselves and go into restaurants, shopping malls, etc..... and blow themselves up. Any group of people that can be convinced of doing that and believe that in doing so they will receive 72 virgins in heaven, suffers from a very large and problematic deffect. Maybe it's retardation from malnutrition or bad genes or something in the water, but whatever it is it is very much messed up.

What about the thousands of Americans who went to Vietnam? They were promised to be heroes, and look at them now. More Americans from the Vietnam war have committed suicide than were killed in the conflict, they're treated like dirt.
Or the Coalition members killed as they hunted out these WMDs. That was crap.
There's two sides to everything, we use media to get people to war, they use religion.

You got a link to that 80% USA bomb theory? I'd be interested :thumbs:

 

[burner69]

Salvador option refers to the way we fought leftist guerillas in El Salvador and the Sandanista regime of Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua.

Basically it involves training groups of counter insurgents that will target and kill the leaders and members of the guerilla movement which we are fighting. Kneejerk lefties and media morons are quick to categorize them as "death squads" mostly because that sound bite gets more people to listen, watch, or read than does counter insurgency strike team.

that is the Salvador option in a nutshell.

Why are they called death squads? Surely there's a reason.

And even with them, you won't beat the anti-Western hate in the world. It'll still go on, and the US will still be at risk.

 

[Scoobnfl]

Why are they called death squads? Surely there's a reason.

And even with them, you won't beat the anti-Western hate in the world. It'll still go on, and the US will still be at risk.

the 80% thing was mentioned on 1 of the cable news networks, I ccan't remember which one, it did mention that it was not scientific though.

they're called death squads cuz it sells.

by understanding the terminology one understands that counter insurgency strike team will likely result in military ops against insurgents and these will likely result in deaths. After all counter insurgency strike team doesn't mean a team that will picket outside the insurgents HQ.

now in El Salvador the teams got a little crazy and some of them massacred and raped some nuns. :angry:

hopefully the lessons learned in the 80's will lead to ensurances of those unfortunate happenings not happening again.

 

[CptStern]

Salvador option refers to the way we fought leftist guerillas in El Salvador and the Sandanista regime of Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua.

yes we all know how that turned out: google Oscar Romero

and nicaragua ...Reagan once referred to the contras as "the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers"

hypocrisy

death squads were responsible for over 63,000 civilian deaths in El Salvador by 1992 ..one of the most well known was in El Mazote where 700-1000 men women and children were slaughtered ..ya that justifies it alright :upstare:

Basically it involves training groups of counter insurgents that will target and kill the leaders and members of the guerilla movement which we are fighting.

it's called state-sponsored terrorism ..the same thing they accused saddam of ...hypocrisy

Kneejerk lefties and media morons are quick to categorize them as "death squads" mostly because that sound bite gets more people to listen, watch, or read than does counter insurgency strike team.
.

really? and that excuses the torture and rape of the civilian populace? is that why the US has a school where latin american despots and their military can take courses in torture?


hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy

 

[Scoobnfl]

What about the thousands of Americans who went to Vietnam? They were promised to be heroes, and look at them now. More Americans from the Vietnam war have committed suicide than were killed in the conflict, they're treated like dirt.

some facts it would seem that you sorely need to read up on regarding the viet nam war.


not written by me, written by Bruce Dwyer

For nearly 30 years I.... like many Vietnam veterans....seldom spoke of Vietnam, except with other veterans, when training soldiers, and in public speeches. These past five years I have joined the hundreds of thousands who believe it is high time the truth be told about the Vietnam War and the people who served there. It's time the American people learn that the United States military did not lose the War, and that a surprisingly high number of people who claim to have served there, in fact, DID NOT.

As Americans support the men and women involved in the War on Terrorism, the mainstream media are once again working tirelessly to undermine their efforts and force a psychological loss or stalemate for the United States. We cannot stand by and let the media do to today's warriors what they did to us 35 years a go.

Below are some assembled some facts most readers will find interesting. It isn't a long read, but it will....I guarantee....teach you some things you did not know about the Vietnam War and those who served, fought, or died there.
Please share it with those with whom you communicate.

Bruce Dwyer

Vietnam War Facts:
Facts, Statistics, Fake Warrior Numbers, and Myths Dispelled

9,087,000 military personnel served on active duty during the official Vietnam era from August 5, 1964 to May 7, 1975.

2,709,918 Americans served in uniform in Vietnam

Vietnam Veterans represented 9.7% of their generation.

240 men were awarded the Medal of Honor during the Vietnam War

The first man to die in Vietnam was James Davis, in 1958. He was with the 509th Radio Research Station. Davis Station in Saigon was named for him.

58,148 were killed in Vietnam

75,000 were severely disabled

23,214 were 100% disabled

5,283 lost limbs

1,081 sustained multiple amputations

Of those killed, 61% were younger than 21

11,465 of those killed were younger than 20 years old

Of those killed, 17,539 were married

Average age of men killed: 23.1 years

Five men killed in Vietnam were only 16 years old.

The oldest man killed was 62 years old.

As of January 15, 2 004, there are 1,875 Americans still unaccounted for from the Vietnam War

97% of Vietnam Veterans were honorably discharged

91% of Vietnam Veterans say they are glad they served

74% say they would serve again, even knowing the outcome

Vietnam veterans have a lower unemployment rate than the same non-vet age groups.

Vietnam veterans' personal income exceeds that of our non-veteran age group by more than 18 percent.

87% of Americans hold Vietnam Veterans in high esteem.

There is no difference in drug usage between Vietnam Veterans and non-Vietnam Veterans of the same age group (Source: Veterans Administration Study)

Vietnam Veterans are less likely to be in prison - only one-half of one percent of Vietnam Veterans have been jailed for crimes.

85% of Vietnam Veterans made successful transitions to civilian life.

Interesting Census Stats and "Been There" Wanabees:

1,713,823 of those who served in Vietnam were still alive as of August, 1995 (census figures).

~ During that same Census count, the number of Americans falsely claiming to have served in-country was: 9,492,958.

~ As of the current Census taken during August, 2000, the surviving U.S. Vietnam Veteran population estimate is: 1,002,511. This is hard to believe, losing nearly 711,000 between '95 and '00. That's 390 per day. During this Census count, the number of Americans falsely claiming to have served in-country is: 13,853,027. By this census, FOUR OUT OF FIVE WHO CLAIM TO BE Vietnam vets are not.

The Department of Defense Vietnam War Service Index officially provided by The War Library originally reported with errors that 2,709,918 U.S. military personnel as having served in-country. Corrections and confirmations to this errored index resulted in the addition of 358 U.S. military personnel confirmed to have served in Vietnam but not originally listed by the Department of Defense. (All names are currently on file and accessible 24/7/365).

Isolated atrocities committed by American Soldiers produced torrents of outrage from anti-war critics and the news media while Communist atrocities were so common that they received hardly any media mention at all. The United States sought to minimize and prevent attacks on civilians while North Vietnam made attacks on civilians a centerpiece of its strategy. Americans who deliberately killed civilians received prison sentences while Communists who did so received commendations. From 1957 to 1973, the National Liberation Front assassinated 36,725 Vietnamese and abducted another 58,499. The death squads focused on leaders at the village level and on anyone who improved the lives of the peasants such as medical personnel, social workers, and school teachers. - Nixon Presidential Papers

Common Myths Dispelled:

Myth: Common Belief is that most Vietnam veterans were drafted.

Fact: 2/3 of the men who served in Vietnam were volunteers. 2/3 of the men who served in World War II were drafted. Approximately 70% of those killed in Vietnam were volunteers.

Myth: The media have reported that suicides among Vietnam veterans range from 50,000 to 100,000 - 6 to 11 times the non-Vietnam veteran population.

Fact: Mortality studies show that 9,000 is a better estimate. "The CDC Vietnam Experience Study Mortality Assessment showed that during the first 5 years after discharge, deaths from suicide were 1.7 times more likely among Vietnam veterans than non-Vietnam veterans. After that initial post-service period, Vietnam veterans were no more likely to die from suicide than non-Vietnam veterans. In fact, after the 5-year post-service period, the rate of suicides is less in the Vietnam veterans' group.

Myth: Common belief is that a disproportionate number of blacks were killed in the Vietnam War.

Fact: 86% of the men who died in Vietnam were Caucasians, 12.5% were black, 1.2% were other races. Sociologists Charles C. Moskos and John Sibley Butler, in their recently published book "All That We Can Be," said they analyzed the claim that blacks were used like cannon fodder during Vietnam "and can report definitely that this charge is untrue. Black fatalities amounted to 12 percent of all Americans killed in Southeast Asia - a figure proportional to the number of blacks in the U.S. population at the time and slightly lower than the proportion of blacks in the Army at the close of the war."

Myth: Common belief is that the war was fought largely by the poor and uneducated.

Fact: Servicemen who went to Vietnam from well-to-do areas had a slightly elevated risk of dying because they were more likely to be pilots or infantry officers. Vietnam Veterans were the best educated forces our nation had ever sent into combat. 79% had a high school education or better.

Here are statistics from the Combat Area Casualty File (CACF) as of November 1993. The CACF is the basis for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial (The Wall): Average age of 58,148 killed in Vietnam was 23.11 years. (Although 58,169 names are in the Nov. 93 database, only 58,148 have both event date and birth date. Event date is used instead of declared dead date for some of those who were listed as missing in action)

Deaths - Average Age
Total: 58,148 23.11 years
Enlisted: 50,274 22.37 years
Officers: 6,598 28.43 years
Warrants: 1,276 24.73 years
E1: 525 20.34 years
11B MOS: 18,465 22.55 years

Myth: The common belief is the average age of an infantryman fighting in Vietnam was 19.

Fact: Assuming KIAs accurately represented age groups serving in Vietnam, the average age of an infantryman (MOS 11B) serving in Vietnam to be 19 years old is a myth, it is actually 22. None of the enlisted grades have an average age of less than 20. The average man who fought in World War II was 26 years of age.

Myth: The Common belief is that the domino theory was proved false.

Fact: The domino theory was accurate. The ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries, Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand stayed free of Communism because of the U.S. commitment to Vietnam. The Indonesians threw the Soviets out in 1966 because of America's commitment in Vietnam. Without that commitment, Communism would have swept all the way to the Malacca Straits that is south of Singapore and of great strategic importance to the free world. If you ask people who live in these countries that won the war in Vietnam, they have a different opinion from the American news media. The Vietnam War was the turning point for Communism.

Myth: The common belief is that the fighting in Vietnam was not as intense as in World War II.

Fact: The average infantryman in the South Pacific during World War II saw about 40 days of combat in four years. The average infantryman in Vietnam saw about 240 days of combat in one year thanks to the mobility of the helicopter. One out of every 10 Americans who served in Vietnam was a casualty. 58,148 were killed and 304,000 wounded out of 2.7 million who served. Although the percent that died is similar to other wars, amputations or crippling wounds were 300 percent higher than in World War II ....75,000 Vietnam veterans are severely disabled. MEDEVAC helicopters flew nearly 500,000 missions. Over 900,000 patients were airlifted (nearly half were American). The average time lapse between wounding to hospitalization was less than one hour. As a result, less than one percent of all Americans wounded, who survived the first 24 hours, died. The helicopter provided unprecedented mobility. Without the helicopter it would have taken three times as many troops to secure the 800 mile border with Cambodia and Laos (the politicians thought the Geneva Conventions of 1954 and the Geneva Accords or 1962 would secure the border).

Myth: Kim Phuc, the little nine year old Vietnamese girl running naked from the napalm strike near Trang Bang on 8 June 1972.....shown a million times on American television....was burned by Americans bombing Trang Bang.

Fact: No American had involvement in this incident near Trang Bang that burned Phan Thi Kim Phuc. The planes doing the bombing near the village were VNAF (Vietnam Air Force) and were being flown by Vietnamese pilots in support of South Vietnamese troops on the ground. The Vietnamese pilot who dropped the napalm in error is currently living in the United States. Even the AP photographer, Nick Ut, who took the picture, was Vietnamese. The incident in the photo took place on the second day of a three day battle between the North Vietnamese Army (NVA) who occupied the village of Trang Bang and the ARVN (Army of the Republic of Vietnam) who were trying to force the NVA out of the village. Recent reports in the news media that an American commander ordered the air strike that burned Kim Phuc are incorrect. There were no Americans involved in any capacity. "We (Americans) had nothing to do with controlling VNAF," according to Lieutenant General (Ret) James F. Hollingsworth, the Commanding General of TRAC at that time. Also, it has been incorrectly reported that two of Kim Phuc's brothers were killed in this incident. They were Kim's cousins not her brothers.

Myth: The United States lost the war in Vietnam.

Fact: The American military was not defeated in Vietnam. The American military did not lose a battle of any consequence. From a military standpoint, it was almost an unprecedented performance. General Westmoreland quoting Douglas Pike, a professor at the University of California, Berkley a renowned expert on the Vietnam War). This included Tet 68, which was a major military defeat for the VC and NVA.

THE UNITED STATES DID NOT LOSE THE WAR IN VIETNAM, THE SOUTH VIETNAMESE DID. Read on........

The fall of Saigon happened 30 April 1975, two years AFTER the American military left Vietnam. The last American troops departed in their entirety 29 March 1973.

How could we lose a war we had already stopped fighting? We fought to an agreed stalemate. The peace settlement was signed in Paris on 27 January 1973. It called for release of all U.S. prisoners, withdrawal of U.S. forces, limitation of both sides' forces inside South Vietnam and a commitment to peaceful reunification. The 140,000 evacuees in April 1975 during the fall of Saigon consisted almost entirely of civilians and Vietnamese military, NOT American military running for their lives. There were almost twice as many casualties in Southeast Asia (primarily Cambodia) the first two years after the fall of Saigon in 1975 then there were during the ten years the U.S. was involved in Vietnam. Thanks for the perceived loss and the countless assassinations and torture visited upon Vietnamese, Laotians, and Cambodians goes mainly to the American media and their undying support-by-misrepresentation of the anti-War movement in the United States.

As with much of the Vietnam War, the news media misreported and misinterpreted the 1968 Tet Offensive. It was reported as an overwhelming success for the Communist forces and a decided defeat for the U.S. forces. Nothing could be further from the truth. Despite initial victories by the Communists forces, the Tet Offensive resulted in a major defeat of those forces. General Vo Nguyen Giap, the designer of the Tet Offensive, is considered by some as ranking with Wellington, Grant, Lee and MacArthur as a great commander. Still, militarily, the Tet Offensive was a total defeat of the Communist forces on all fronts. It resulted in the death of some 45,000 NVA troops and the complete, if not total destruction of the Viet Cong elements in South Vietnam. The Organization of the Viet Cong Units in the South never recovered. The Tet Offensive succeeded on only one front and that was the News front and the political arena. This was another example in the Vietnam War of an inaccuracy becoming the perceived truth. However inaccurately reported, the News Media made the Tet Offensive famous.

"Vietnam History"
http://4dw.net/jqueen/history.html

VIETNAM REMEMBERED
http://remembervietnam.homestead.com/

Top 100 Vietnam Veterans WebSites
http://www.topsitelists.com/start/vietnamvet/topsites.html

"18th Engineers"
http://4dw.net/jqueen/truth.html

Movie Review: We Were Soldiers (Once.....and Young)
http://remembervietnam.homestead.com/idrrang.html
-----------------------------------------------
Cheers

 

[Scoobnfl]

yes we all know how that turned out: google Oscar Romero

and nicaragua ...Reagan once referred to the contras as "the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers"

hypocrisy

death squads were responsible for over 63,000 civilian deaths in El Salvador by 1992 ..one of the most well known was in El Mazote where 700-1000 men women and children were slaughtered ..ya that justifies it alright :upstare:

nice of you to leave out the tens of thousands killed by the leftist guerillas. do you do that intentionally or does your ignorance blind you that much?

it's called state-sponsored terrorism ..the same thing they accused saddam of ...hypocrisy

hardly..... it's called leveling the playing field.

really? and that excuses the torture and rape of the civilian populace? is that why the US has a school where latin american despots and their military can take courses in torture?


hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy

the school of the americas is an excellent tool used in fighting the leftist guerilla movement in central and south america.

do not forget that the leftist guerillas kill, murder, rape, kidnap, extort etc..... and in order to combat such shadow groups "outside the box" measures must be implemented.

 

[CptStern]

nice of you to leave out the tens of thousands killed by the leftist guerillas. do you do that intentionally or does your ignorance blind you that much?

well maybe you shouldnt be supporting the governmental forces that were responsible for thousands of civilian deaths

hardly..... it's called leveling the playing field.

you're either dumb as dirt, or you're so steemed in indoctrination that you cant even surface ...or as I suspect, you're in the military. How can the hypocrisy escape you? I dont understand how you think it's ok for the US to harbour and support terrorism but then turn around and cry foul when some other country does ..blind unmitigated hypocrisy

the school of the americas is an excellent tool used in fighting the leftist guerilla movement in central and south america.

really? then why does the graduates look like a rogues gallery of inhumanity? :

Long list of former graduates that have been tried or arrested for crimes against humanity, drug trafficing, assisnation, murder, torture etc

but I'm sure you'll take the time to look thru it :upstare: if not, why not read what congress thinks about the school

do not forget that the leftist guerillas kill, murder, rape, kidnap, extort etc..... and in order to combat such shadow groups "outside the box" measures must be implemented.

the same methods used by the "terrorists"? hypocrisy, you're no better than the terrorists

 

[KoreBolteR]

i guess it is, since as soon as america and allies attacked taliban, the taliban recriuted more members, THANKS to al-jazeera television news network... .

That is incorrect, Al Jazeera is simply the 'Fox News' of the Middle East, I used to live there.

Secondly, the Taliban (Originally the Soviet-Fighting, CIA-Funded Mujahadeen) aquired a large number of recruits after being attacked becuase of all of the angry men left after the attacks.




Couldn't agree more.

im sure Fox News helps americans join the marines also.

my statement stands.