On 9/10/13 8:48 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...


My issues generally aren't with the individuals who were drafted or
enlisted and sent over to Vietnam. I do have issues, though, with
right-wingers who think there was something wonderful and honorable
about going over there to kill SE Asians because they were somehow being
"patriotic." That's a nice rationalization, but Vietnam wasn't Germany,
Japan, or even Italy.

-------------------------------

I don't know a single person .... veteran or non veteran ....
right-winger or left-winger who thinks is was something wonderful and
honorable about killing anyone period. If you served in a war zone, it
was a question of kill or be killed. Your views and claims on the
subject are typical of someone who has little knowledge or experience
with what the military is all about, other than what you read in books.

And again, you demonstrate *my* point that you continue to miss. You
said this:

" This was in the early 1960s, and there simply wasn't much going on
militarily for us anywhere, at least not much that was talked about on
the Nightly News."

Harry, deciding to serve your country has little to do with "what's in
it for me?"




Draftees "served" because they were drafted. Many but not all of those
who enlisted signed up because they had nothing else to do. That was the
case of the one guy I knew from high school who enlisted. He spent his
three years of high school fooling around and I suppose decided he
couldn't make it at college or in a disciplined apprenticeship program
to learn a skilled trade. So he joined the army.

There was a lot of the "my country right or wrong" bull**** in the mid
to late 1960's...I think Vietnam helped most thinking Americans get over
that kind of absurdity.

I volunteered to be a program officer for an agricultural program in
Vietnam and trained for it and when I got there, I found out the program
had been cancelled. So I was given an opportunity to volunteer for other
civilian duty over there and I took it. There are many ways to "serve"
one's country without wearing a uniform and patting yourself on the back
for the rest of your life because you did so. These days, and for
decades, I have been more impressed with the service of teachers,
nurses, social workers, anti-poverty workers, firemen, et cetera, than I
have been by the service of soldiers, because the civilians are working
every day to improve the lives of Americans who need help.

On 9/10/2013 8:58 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 9/10/13 8:48 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...


My issues generally aren't with the individuals who were drafted or
enlisted and sent over to Vietnam. I do have issues, though, with
right-wingers who think there was something wonderful and honorable
about going over there to kill SE Asians because they were somehow being
"patriotic." That's a nice rationalization, but Vietnam wasn't Germany,
Japan, or even Italy.

-------------------------------

I don't know a single person .... veteran or non veteran ....
right-winger or left-winger who thinks is was something wonderful and
honorable about killing anyone period. If you served in a war zone, it
was a question of kill or be killed. Your views and claims on the
subject are typical of someone who has little knowledge or experience
with what the military is all about, other than what you read in books.

And again, you demonstrate *my* point that you continue to miss. You
said this:

" This was in the early 1960s, and there simply wasn't much going on
militarily for us anywhere, at least not much that was talked about on
the Nightly News."

Harry, deciding to serve your country has little to do with "what's in
it for me?"




Draftees "served" because they were drafted. Many but not all of those
who enlisted signed up because they had nothing else to do. That was the
case of the one guy I knew from high school who enlisted. He spent his
three years of high school fooling around and I suppose decided he
couldn't make it at college or in a disciplined apprenticeship program
to learn a skilled trade. So he joined the army.

There was a lot of the "my country right or wrong" bull**** in the mid
to late 1960's...I think Vietnam helped most thinking Americans get over
that kind of absurdity.

I volunteered to be a program officer for an agricultural program in
Vietnam and trained for it and when I got there, I found out the program
had been cancelled. So I was given an opportunity to volunteer for other
civilian duty over there and I took it. There are many ways to "serve"
one's country without wearing a uniform and patting yourself on the back
for the rest of your life because you did so. These days, and for
decades, I have been more impressed with the service of teachers,
nurses, social workers, anti-poverty workers, firemen, et cetera, than I
have been by the service of soldiers, because the civilians are working
every day to improve the lives of Americans who need help.




You sure are a slippery one. But no worries. We have a firm grasp on the
knowledge of what's wrong with you. And it ain't pretty.

In article , says...

On 9/10/13 8:48 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...


My issues generally aren't with the individuals who were drafted or
enlisted and sent over to Vietnam. I do have issues, though, with
right-wingers who think there was something wonderful and honorable
about going over there to kill SE Asians because they were somehow being
"patriotic." That's a nice rationalization, but Vietnam wasn't Germany,
Japan, or even Italy.

-------------------------------

I don't know a single person .... veteran or non veteran ....
right-winger or left-winger who thinks is was something wonderful and
honorable about killing anyone period. If you served in a war zone, it
was a question of kill or be killed. Your views and claims on the
subject are typical of someone who has little knowledge or experience
with what the military is all about, other than what you read in books.

And again, you demonstrate *my* point that you continue to miss. You
said this:

" This was in the early 1960s, and there simply wasn't much going on
militarily for us anywhere, at least not much that was talked about on
the Nightly News."

Harry, deciding to serve your country has little to do with "what's in
it for me?"




Draftees "served" because they were drafted. Many but not all of those
who enlisted signed up because they had nothing else to do. That was the
case of the one guy I knew from high school who enlisted. He spent his
three years of high school fooling around and I suppose decided he
couldn't make it at college or in a disciplined apprenticeship program
to learn a skilled trade. So he joined the army.

There was a lot of the "my country right or wrong" bull**** in the mid
to late 1960's...I think Vietnam helped most thinking Americans get over
that kind of absurdity.

I volunteered to be a program officer for an agricultural program in
Vietnam and trained for it and when I got there, I found out the program
had been cancelled. So I was given an opportunity to volunteer for other
civilian duty over there and I took it. There are many ways to "serve"
one's country without wearing a uniform and patting yourself on the back
for the rest of your life because you did so. These days, and for
decades, I have been more impressed with the service of teachers,
nurses, social workers, anti-poverty workers, firemen, et cetera, than I
have been by the service of soldiers, because the civilians are working
every day to improve the lives of Americans who need help.

So my working for the USDA qualifies for service to my country, according to you?