Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Forty two years ago, yesterday, the Ohio National Guard opened fire on the campus of Kent State University and killed four students.
As it turned out, several of the students were in no way even involved in anti-Vietnam protests occurring on the campus. They were simply walking to class.
How did this happen? What was the justification (or lack thereof) for soldiers carrying loaded guns on a college campus, let alone firing those weapons? Assuming there was an issue with "crowd control" was there no method short of firing a loaded gun to control that crowd?
This tragedy was investigated. What were the facts? Who is responsible for the carnage that occurred. Why was no one ever sent to jail?
To this day, I have a lot more questions about this event than I have answers.
I think that there will always be more questions than answers. From my experience it is extremely dificult to have poorly trained individuals maintain composure in a tense situation. less so when they are armed. I dont know why but let me tell you what I do know. (which isn't much). My fathers best friends daughter was married to a sargent in the national guard who was there. (I know this sounds like a long time ago and Far far away there lived a...) in 1998 I visited them while visiting colleges (for my daughter) he stated that -he was there, his company was not issued ammunition, they didn't fire any shots, and that no one gave an order to fire. someone fired and every one else in "the platoon" started to fire. "they were scared" and that they had never been trained in anti rioting techniques. as they were being driven there they were told that "there was a riot" on the campus and that they were being sent there to "maintain order"
Correct but, if I recall, those instances just simmered for years....what were the odds of two statesmen getting shot within a couple months of each other. Mr. Kings assasinination was a real turning point around the area. Sensitivities of the black community really, really changed the way people carried themselves. That, combined with Tet seemed to change folks mind considerably. Kent State was one more exclamation point of that turning point.
No one got over it and it changed the way society dealt with war ever since. I can still vividly remember the tension of the Sumer of 68 even as a kid. Cars, dress, everything was changing. I guess just too much happened that year for people to digest. Tet, 2 killings, DNC in Chicago.....too much in a short period of time.
Arguably the worst year in our history. Except for the Detroit Tiger fans.
And if Nixon hadn't gone into Cambodia there would have been no protest.
There are many ways to look at this horrible, horrible event.
Tet assured the protest. Bombing Cambodia and then suddenly pulling out was originally intended to try and stop the infiltration of supplies down the Ho Chi Minh Trail, nothing more. One sticky jungle adjacent to another. It was his intent to break the supply lines....he quickly reversed when the media got a toe hold on it....they were just trying to save American lives....
Shame they hadn't kept bombing North Vietnam in the original campaign back in 1965....that sloooooooooow escalation got a lot of people killed and maimed on both sides....Chuck Horner, aka Desert Storm fame, said it best....when you got o war you have an obligation to end it as quickly as possible....him and Stormin' Norman took that tact and reversed the failed strategic policies of Viet Nam to make sure no kid suffered the same fate in 1991.....it worked. In the end, it saved lives on both sides.....a long drawn out war is never good for either side....
Look at us in the Middle East....we've lost what, 5-6K lives and wounded another 20,000 or so??? At least we are/were prosecuting this war more aggressively. In Vietnam, 7,000 were killed in the 2nd half of 1967....Iraq and Iran and Afghanistan took the better part of 8 years to total up losses we suffered in 6-9 months in Vietnam.....think about it.
No, the move to Cambodia was smart at first, he just chickened out when the media got wind of it.....didn't matter, Tet turned the war...that and Cronkite's famous speech....the rest was just time....
I still stand by my logic...man with big loaded gun, run.....for God's sake, the guardsmen were on bull horns warning them over and over that they had live rounds and were authorized to use them.....and no one....beleived it??? Even during wartime???
In the words of dry, cool, Calvin Cooledge......You lose....
I still stand by my logic...man with big loaded gun, run.....for God's sake, the guardsmen were on bull horns warning them over and over that they had live rounds and were authorized to use them.....and no one....beleived it??? Even during wartime???
In the words of dry, cool, Calvin Cooledge......You lose....
I love these opinions from those that never lived the experience. I guess you think the killings of the protestors in the Middle East justified also? What we did at Kent State is no different than what is going on in Syria except on a much smaller scale. Giving the unpopular nature of the current wars, if we did not have an all volunteer army today, a repeat of this terrible time in American History could be repeated.
The best thing that could happen is for Congress to pass a law stating that any military action by the US would automatically trigger a "war tax" to pay for it. This tax would hit EVERYONE, not just the 51% that currently pay income taxes.
I love these opinions from those that never lived the experience. I guess you think the killings of the protestors in the Middle East justified also? What we did at Kent State is no different than what is going on in Syria except on a much smaller scale. Giving the unpopular nature of the current wars, if we did not have an all volunteer army today, a repeat of this terrible time in American History could be repeated.
The best thing that could happen is for Congress to pass a law stating that any military action by the US would automatically trigger a "war tax" to pay for it. This tax would hit EVERYONE, not just the 51% that currently pay income taxes.
Gee Greg, is it fair to say that in the context of the times, things were a bit different? We didn't even have 911 back then let alone civil unrest plans...did we. Tis happened at a time when America was least prepared for it. Was it tragic? You bet. However, I never could understand anyone's logic of walking in front of a bunch of guys with loaded guns, who said repeatedly over megaphones that they were authorized to shoot and then becam befuddled when they actually did shoot..there is ample blame on both sides. I lived through the experince at age 12 25 miles away. I was more than old enough to get it with friends older siblings routinely coming back from viet nam. That coupled with 4 years in the marines gave me a better than average perspective.
Syria is syrias own doing. Would you like us to engage in that melee too? Only to be criticized by the left for inaction followed up quickly by the criticism for having acted.
Wikipedia says there are legal and practical reasons for not re-opening the case. Why hasn't the case been re-opened? Secondly, have the Strubbe tapes been as carefully analyzed as the Kennedy Assaination tapes have? Such as analysis with state-of-the-art audio equipment? Or were they just listened to with people listening? Also, why was the Strubbe tape only found in 2007? Didn't Mr. Strubbe say he made a tape? What library was this tape found in?
It just doesn't make any sense to me. Now, I certainly do not believe in conspiracy theories...people always talk. However, why haven't even more people come forward with evidence? I just do not understand how something so well documented can have so many unanswered questions.
Finally, I vaguely remember my high school history teacher talking about the incident. If my memory is correct, he suggested that there are still classified documents about the matter. Is my memory correct (I was told this 15 years ago)? OR was my teacher wrong? Or is there really classified documents in existence in the intelligence community that are not available to the public?
Now, I am not a technical expert, but is the method used to analyze those tapes the only way of analyzing old tapes? Shouldn't more programs from more experts be tried?
The article states that most of those guardsmen are now deceased. But what about the officers that had the authority to give a command. Did I hear correctly that there were three officers there? Who are they and are they still alive? Even among the deceased guardsmen...I am sure somebody said something over the years or on their deathbed.
Does the DOD or FBI still ahve documents and information classified on the topic?
This is one of the most unbiased articles I've read on this subject. The protestors' actions in the three days prior is what led to the calling of the National Guard troops to Kent State. According to the article, there was an estimated total of 3,000 people on the grounds during the protest. The National Guard troops were vastly outnumbered and the protestors were getting agitated and confrontational with the Guardsmen. In the days prior to the shooting, the protestors had already rioted in the streets (including flipping vehicles, setting vehicles on fire, and making threats to attack businesses) as well as burning down the ROTC building. So no, these were not the peaceful protest history revisionist would like you to believe. In multiple trials, the National Guard troops testified that they felt their lives were in danger from the thousands of people they faced that day. Though the 3,000 or so were not all protestors, that is what the Guard faced that day. Ever see the movie Zulu? Just because a small force has superior weapons doesn't mean they can't be killed when faced with superior numbers. The police and Guard had already used non-lethal force before (tear gas and bean bags) and yet the protestors were still there. It's sad that so much revisionist version of events create the illusion that it was a peaceful protest until the National Guard troops open fired. It seems the protestors weren't the innocent victims history makes them out to be. Some would say the Guard should not have been there in the first place. OK, but they were called out because of the violent actions of the protestors and they had already burned down one school building. How far would they go without authority presence?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
