Big Kahunas

"mike regish" writes:

I did too. By joining the navy. Kept me out of Vietnam. And I'm not the
least bit ashamed of it. Seemed at the time to be a bogus war. Turned out,
as uninformed as I was, I was right.

Yeah, I can't claim that my distaste for that war at that time was
based on fully conclusive evidence. But it *is* nice when hindsight
confirms ones judgement of the moment.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: noguns-nomoney.com www.dd-b.net/carry/
Photos: dd-b.lighthunters.net Snapshots: www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: dragaera.info/

Yeah, I can't claim that my distaste for that war at that time was
based on fully conclusive evidence. But it *is* nice when hindsight
confirms ones judgement of the moment.

Funny thing is, many historians (with the benefit of increasing distance
from the emotional event) are now viewing our decision to fight the Viet Nam
war as pivotal in our ultimate Cold War victory over the Soviet Union. Our
willingness to shed the blood of American boys in Viet Nam seems to have
genuinely stopped the Soviets from further mischief all over the world.

Maybe the war wasn't so bogus after all?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:MXvyb.371905$Tr4.1101284@attbi_s03...
Yeah, I can't claim that my distaste for that war at that time was
based on fully conclusive evidence. But it *is* nice when hindsight
confirms ones judgement of the moment.

Funny thing is, many historians (with the benefit of increasing distance
from the emotional event) are now viewing our decision to fight the Viet
Nam
war as pivotal in our ultimate Cold War victory over the Soviet Union. Our
willingness to shed the blood of American boys in Viet Nam seems to have
genuinely stopped the Soviets from further mischief all over the world.

Five years after the fall of Saigon, the USSR invaded Afghanistan. So much
for that theory.

The only thing the kept the Soviets from mischief was going broke.


Maybe the war wasn't so bogus after all?

It was bogus from start to finish.

"Jay Honeck" writes:

Yeah, I can't claim that my distaste for that war at that time was
based on fully conclusive evidence. But it *is* nice when hindsight
confirms ones judgement of the moment.

Funny thing is, many historians (with the benefit of increasing distance
from the emotional event) are now viewing our decision to fight the Viet Nam
war as pivotal in our ultimate Cold War victory over the Soviet Union. Our
willingness to shed the blood of American boys in Viet Nam seems to have
genuinely stopped the Soviets from further mischief all over the world.

Now, *that's* a new one on me. I thought it was *their* loss in
Afghanistan that did it really.

Maybe the war wasn't so bogus after all?

Still looks grotesquely immoral to me -- fighting to support an
unpopular repressive dictatorship.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: noguns-nomoney.com www.dd-b.net/carry/
Photos: dd-b.lighthunters.net Snapshots: www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: dragaera.info/

In article MXvyb.371905$Tr4.1101284@attbi_s03, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Yeah, I can't claim that my distaste for that war at that time was
based on fully conclusive evidence. But it *is* nice when hindsight
confirms ones judgement of the moment.

Funny thing is, many historians (with the benefit of increasing distance
from the emotional event) are now viewing our decision to fight the Viet
Nam
war as pivotal in our ultimate Cold War victory over the Soviet Union.

and many historians will try to tell you that the US forced
Japan into WWII.

break the code. :-(

--
Bob Noel

and many historians will try to tell you that the US forced
Japan into WWII.

break the code. :-(

How?

It really does make one question the accepted versions of history, doesn't
it? I mean, if historians can get things SO wrong, so quickly -- what
chance for accuracy do we have when referring to things that happened a
century ago? Or in the last millennium?

They always say that history is written by the victors, thus warping
reality -- but there seems to be far more to it than that.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 02:23:07 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

and many historians will try to tell you that the US forced
Japan into WWII.

break the code. :-(

How?

It really does make one question the accepted versions of history, doesn't
it? I mean, if historians can get things SO wrong, so quickly -- what
chance for accuracy do we have when referring to things that happened a
century ago? Or in the last millennium?

They always say that history is written by the victors, thus warping
reality -- but there seems to be far more to it than that.

I'm waiting to see a citation of a non-Japanese historian who thinks
that Japan didn't invade Korea, Manchuria, China, the Pacific islands,
etc., starting long before 12/7/41. The last popular book I remember
on Japanese atrocities was _The Rape of Nanking_ , published in 1997,
_The Comfort Women: Japan's Brutal Regime of Enforced Prostitution in
the Second World War_ came out in 1995.

Don

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:fCxyb.372899$Tr4.1107176@attbi_s03...
and many historians will try to tell you that the US forced
Japan into WWII.

break the code. :-(

How?

By shutting down their access to oil and other resources.


It really does make one question the accepted versions of history, doesn't
it? I mean, if historians can get things SO wrong, so quickly -- what
chance for accuracy do we have when referring to things that happened a
century ago? Or in the last millennium?

It makes a difference when a historian has an agenda (the "status quo" for
example, or trying to play "revisionist"), as opposed to objectivity. It's
like other fields of endeavor where the participants pick and choose facts
that support their conclusions, but ignore vast quantities of facts and data
that nullifies their position.


They always say that history is written by the victors, thus warping
reality -- but there seems to be far more to it than that.

Even the losers sometime re-write history. See, for example, what Japanese
children are being taught about WW2, or what children in the former Soviet
block were taught about loads of history. Hell, see what OUR kids are being
taught.

break the code. :-(

How?

By shutting down their access to oil and other resources.

???

What does that mean? Who is "their"?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:S3zyb.373891$Tr4.1110611@attbi_s03...
break the code. :-(

How?

By shutting down their access to oil and other resources.

???

What does that mean? Who is "their"?
Japan's. During the 30's, the Dutch East Indies (IIRC) was the main source
of oil and other resources (Japan had about as many local resources as they
do now.) They were essentially "shut out".