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.
There was wide spread hatred of troops back then in many universities and especially along the east coast. My dad was stationed on a ship in San Diego in the mid to late 60s. Him and his buddies would tell us about the "warm welcome" they received upon returning from deployment. They tried to disguise themselves so as not to appear a member of the military. They tried to travel in groups for protection in the USA. They felt safer in Guam and Philipines than in the state of California. Even today, there are still universities and places in California that hate the American military (like Berkeley for example).
Nonsense. I don't believe it. It's a story that fits very nicely in that ol' fashioned right wing narrative that liberals hate the military.
There was no widespread hatred of the soldiers during Vietnam. That's a bunch of bull. There wasn't even a little bit of hatred towards the soldiers. The hatred was directed towards a war that even the soldiers hated.
I disagree, my dad said people spit at them and yelled "baby killer" as they got off the bus at the Amory.
Spanish American War, World War 1 and World War 2 - the soldiers were welcomed back with parades and generally acknowledged as returning heros.
Korean War - the soliders returning were largely ignored by the civilian populace.
Vietnam War - the soldiers again were largely ignored, except later in the war by some anti-war protestors who did indeed go out of their way to verbally abuse and sometimes even spit on those returning from war.
The Persian Gulf War (Kuwait's liberation) - back to the parades, accolades and respect that military personnel usually received.
The Afghanistan and Iraq Wars - returning vets got a "Mission Accomplished" celebration on an air craft carrier, but ten years into the war the vets still get respect if not as many parades.
I disagree, my dad said people spit at them and yelled "baby killer" as they got off the bus at the Amory.
Every other conservative makes this same claim. The evidence doesn't support it. Besides, that story is so trite and worn out that only a fool couldn't see throught it.
It's always "i was spat on and called baby killer."
And i don't buy it for a second. It was almost always on the West Coast in some airport...usually San Francisco or Oakland, and almost always a female who did the spitting and name calling.
Funny how there isn't a single blotter report in existence in any west coast police department that can be found of a single spitting incident on a soldier and moreover, not a single case of a soldier retaliating at being spat upon. And MILLIONS of soldiers went through those airports....not ONE soldier retaliated? Never? Who are you kidding?
Again, this stuff is a load of bull. Someone made it up back then and it spread like wildfire to the point that it's the popular thing to say. But there isn't a lick of truth to it.
The Westboro Baptist Church is a small, family-based organization that has as much to do with actual Christianity as bologna has to do with prime cuts of meat.
There is no point in bringing them up and getting upset at "what Christians are doing."
The Westboro Baptist Church is a small, family-based organization that has as much to do with actual Christianity as bologna has to do with prime cuts of meat.
There is no point in bringing them up and getting upset at "what Christians are doing."
The point is valid when we start painting a faction of the populace with a broad brush.
The Westboro Baptist Church is a small, family-based organization that has as much to do with actual Christianity as bologna has to do with prime cuts of meat.
There is no point in bringing them up and getting upset at "what Christians are doing."
They're also heavily politically active and the leaders of WBC have run as Demcorats in many local elections.
Every other conservative makes this same claim. The evidence doesn't support it. Besides, that story is so trite and worn out that only a fool couldn't see throught it.
It's always "i was spat on and called baby killer."
And i don't buy it for a second. It was almost always on the West Coast in some airport...usually San Francisco or Oakland, and almost always a female who did the spitting and name calling.
Funny how there isn't a single blotter report in existence in any west coast police department that can be found of a single spitting incident on a soldier and moreover, not a single case of a soldier retaliating at being spat upon. And MILLIONS of soldiers went through those airports....not ONE soldier retaliated? Never? Who are you kidding?
Again, this stuff is a load of bull. Someone made it up back then and it spread like wildfire to the point that it's the popular thing to say. But there isn't a lick of truth to it.
I wasnt born yet when the vietnam war was going on, but I have been reading that most of the population back in the states had hatred for the soldiers over there fighting, just wondering why that was?
There is little to no evidence that hatred of soldiers ever happened. People were protesting the war, however, it was the administration & war they were protesting, not soldiers. I believe there were radical extremes who did treat them badly but mainstream didn't agree with them. Most of those soldiers having so much difficulty coping on their return home because the mission itself was unsound and they felt little to no support on their return home. That was wrong on America's part. I'd like to think this era is wiser but too many seem to believe it's enough to show up for a parade and put a tacky ribbon on their car. We owe them so much more than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlk1974
People will first take it out on the elected to office in washington, then after awhile, they begin to have hatred for the troops who decide to serve. It may not seem that way with all the support our troops signs we see all over, but I believe what happened in vietnam will happen again once people get sick of hearing about it.
Vietnam was a quagmire and so is Afghanistan. We owe the troops a sound mission statement. Blaming troops isn't going on. That's smoke and mirrors used by arrogant politicians to deflect their own incompetence and/or malevolent abuse of power.
Our foreign policy has been in need of revision since the 60's. I'm not Libertarian but I agree with their observations on this subject. They won this debate on merits alone. "Empire" is not sustainable, nor can we spend our every waking moment fighting other people's civil wars throughout the globe. It's a smokescreen for false pretense assistance that only makes humanity at large suspicious of genuine help that arrives during emergencies. Humanitarian missions need to be just that and not muddied with other agendas.
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.
