https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...r-around-world
Articles like this is why Google had to demonitize Zero Hedge.
TheGreatYacht
It's not. Sydney MacCaine was warmongering. Come to terms.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...r-around-world
Articles like this is why Google had to demonitize Zero Hedge.
TheGreatYacht
There really isn't. It's ing sad that the center looks up to people like him and Romney, but that's the world we live in today.
What actions, man? He voted to repeal every bill for Obamacare, besides the final one. He's a neocon pos who deserved to rot in a Vietnam cell, much like every troop who landed there.
That last bill turned out to be huge.
Also, since you like to rant and rave about immigration, he was one of the Gang of 8 which put a law on the table (Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013), that actually had a path to citizenship for your compadres...
(tangentially, lol @ Lindsey Graham and little Marco being there too)
Don't know enough about that bill in 2013 tbh.
The bill ed a lot of working class people over here, though. When Obamacare came in, my dad had to get a ty plan because he worked for a small emplyer and was over the age of 40 spending over 100 dollars a week on healthcare that was too expensive for him to begin with.
I think my good graces that I have union healthcare and all that, but it's so ing stupid to tie in healthcare to employment, but apperantly that's what "we" voted for, even though over 2/3 of democrats want m4a.
Every American soldier in nam deserved to die?
The internet is extremely revealing.
I don't like Obamacare either, but flat out removing it right now and leaving 8 million people without insurance doesn't strike me as the wisest choice.
To me, it's even more incredible that it's been what, almost 10 years since Obamacare has been around and red team still don't have any replacement. You would think with the atrocity that is that law, it should be relatively easy to come up with something marginally better.
I believe so
There is something that wou;d be better, but obviously the right isn't going to want anything even remotely left of what is in place.
I do feel bad for some, because they might come from nothing and think the army is their way out, but it's ing ty. Vietnam was somewhere we never should have been, and having Yale boys like HW and other people who only used it for their political gain deserved to have public executions
Never for a second should you feel bad when people like McCain, HW, Cheney, Powell(who is ansolute piece of that did a lot to villainize Iraq in the 90's) and of course W die. They all killed lots of innocent civilians across Vietnam and the middle east. Don't forget Obama, either, who had the majority of his civilian kills placedas combatants
You think Americans joined the army to go to Vietnam?
You ever heard of the draft?
Also gonna celebrate when Clinton dies. The both of them.
Very true. I overstepped my ground.
It’s cool.
You referenced this before. What is your ending take on it?
I'm as antiwar as they come, but this reads as edgy "woke" bull that always has to reflexively take the anti-American position out of iconoclastic hipness.
Was Vietnam "worth it" for the United States? No. Was our involvement in Vietnam morally justified, yes. The North invaded the economically flourishing South for the purpose of unifying the country into hole communist state. How many South Vietnamese fled here because staying there meant certain death?
Funny enough, when Vietnam found communism wasn't working too well, they reverted back to a market economy.
^And if you want to take a view-from-nowhere moral position (meaning no bias, and just valuing life as life), we should've stayed and finished the job. American forces didn't lose many battles in Vietnam and it was only a matter of time before we likely achieved victory. Yes, personally, as an American, it wasn't worth it, but the view-from-nowhere position could actually consider our withdrawal immoral because Vietnam turned into a dysfunctional -hole after we left. Hundreds of thousands forced into reeducation camps, the North Vietnamese losing hold on the Khmer Rouge, which allowed Pol Pot to rise and genocide a million people (wouldn't have happened if we were there), forcing over a million refugees to flee the country, and just general poverty and suffering throughout the country.
Marquez describes this worker's paradise:
What could've been.Gabriel García Márquez, a Nobel Prize winning writer, described South Vietnam as a "False paradise" after the war, when he visited in 1980: "The cost of this delirium was stupefying: 360,000 people mutilated, a million widows, 500,000 pros utes, 500,000 drug addicts, a million tuberculous and more than a million soldiers of the old regime, impossible to completely rehabilitate into a new society. Ten percent of the population of Ho Chi Minh City was suffering from serious venereal diseases when the war ended, and there were 4 million illiterates throughout the South."
A 2017 study in the journal Diplomatic History found that South Vietnamese economic planners sought to model the South Vietnamese economy on Taiwan and South Korea, which were perceived as successful examples of how to modernize developing economies.[34]
Last edited by midnightpulp; 07-04-2020 at 03:30 AM.
The same exact that countries do all the time, that the US doesn't get involved in all the time, but do so when words like communism come up.
And woke is a ty term that you hear people like Bill Maher use, and those on twitter who can't stand Trump
So what you're implying is you want moral consistency from the United States, and you think the US only gets involved when it's in our geopolitical interest? Obviously we do, as all countries do. No countries engage in war purely out of moral good.
But your earlier comment about veterans who served over there (willingly) should have all been left for dead implies you think they were in the moral wrong for signing up for the war. They weren't. North Vietnam was the aggressor, and we saw the absolute hole Vietnam turned into following reunification. South Vietnam and their sponsors weren't angels (the Diem regime), but South Vietnam was indeed progressing to becoming a future "Asian tiger" of an economy. "Reunification" probably set that country back a century. They are still massively poor over there.
I'm no cutthroat capitalist, but communism in practice is a ideology, and from an objective perspective, it's a moral good to fight it. Would I personally fight it or want my countrymen to fight it if it wasn't a direct threat to our national security? No. But that's me taking a subjective position because I value my life and the life of my friends more than the political situation in other countries.
Communism might be a hold adealogy, but to seek out and kill lowly farmers and other civilians for what?
My thing is is theUS acts like whatever they did was out of moral good, and being the " good guys" which I absolutely belived in when I was younger, but that isn't the case. We killed Iraq long, long before 9/11 with our sanctions and we absolutely killed generations of vietnam children with corrosives that we placed on than nation. I just don't like the fact that we try and sit here as some holier than thou nation when we are ing evil. And to the half infirmed person, that might be obviousm but not everyone is even hald informed, which is my gripe.
We sit here and paint Kuwait and the Saudi's as great democracies while ripping Iraq, at least as far the media.
I'm ing drunk right now tho so excuse my typos
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)