US starts landmark cleanup of Agent Orange nearly 4 decades after Vietnam War’s end

[bemildred]

Source: AP

DANANG, Vietnam — The United States began a landmark project Thursday to clean up a dangerous chemical left from the defoliant Agent Orange — 50 years after American planes first sprayed it on Vietnam’s jungles to destroy enemy cover.

Dioxin, which has been linked to cancer, birth defects and other disabilities, will be removed from the site of a former U.S. air base in Danang in central Vietnam. The effort is seen as a long-overdue step toward removing a thorn in relations between the former foes nearly four decades after the Vietnam War ended.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/us-starts-landmark-cleanup-of-agent-orange-nearly-4-decades-after-vietnam-wars-end/2012/08/09/3bfc819a-e1d7-11e1-89f7-76e23a982d06_story.html

---

Almost forty years on, and we are still cleaning up the mess. How long will we be paying for Iraq and Afghanistan?

[The Wizard]

1. Enough of the victims are dead and no longer able

to collect compensation for damages done in our illegal and immoral invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation. And all because American big business wanted to steal their natural resources.

[bemildred]

2. Yep.

I remember more than one former soldier that died of Agent Orange.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange

[harun]

5. Worth of Human Life

The life of a single human being is worth a million times more than all the property of the richest man on earth.
-Ernesto "Che" Guevara

[coalition_unwilling]

72. That is a beautiful quote. Thanks for sharing - n/t

[Missycim]

80. I am all for us

paying for the clean up of any toxin we left on or near the battlefield.

[RKP5637]

53. Yep, American Exceptionalism at work again. n/t

[heaven05]

3. yep

as quiet as it's kept it's still very difficult for vets who sucked that stuff in, like me, to get help.

[Warren DeMontague]

10. I think it's inappropriate to imply that a serviceperson who was drafted is somehow responsible

for their exposure to a toxic chemical.

The people responsible for the policy were the people at the top; not the draftees.

Second-guessing what someone "ought to have done", some 40 years after the fact- not cool, either, in my book.

ALL the victims of Agent Orange should receive help- US Servicepeople and Vietnamese alike.

[heaven05]

12. thanks

I didn't want to go off on this individual. I won't give a response. Yeah, I agree on the Vietnamese peoples also.

[Warren DeMontague]

18. I had to rewrite that a few times

that was the, uh, ultra-restrained version.

Thank you for your service.

[hanscastorp79]

20. thank you for your service?

Look, not wanting him to get cancer from toxic chemicals is one thing... but thanking him for his service? I've been travel teaching for a while, and I often tell people I'm Canadian because of his service.

I am not grateful for his service. It made the world a worse place.

[Warren DeMontague]

23. That's what I said.

I think the Vietnam war was a terrible war, a bad war, a wrong war.

But I still thank him for his service.

[Warren DeMontague]

24. And, actually, YOU implied that the effects of AO were deserved "consequences" for being there.

That's an extremely fucked up thing to say.

[hanscastorp79]

30. I never said they were deserved, but they were definitely some of the consequences.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. this was the wording you used:

I know that it sucks, but you did participate in an immoral war. You chose to go there instead of to Canada. These are the consequences for your actions.

That does not just imply consequences, it implies a degree of deserved-ness to them, tied to the moral choice of not evading the draft. That's how I read it.

And let's remember, being drafted is not the same thing as volunteering, also "not breaking the law, leaving the country, and evading the draft" is not the same thing as volunteering. A lot of people had reasons they couldn't, for instance, go to Canada. Family here. Perhaps a personal injunction against breaking the law. Perhaps they felt it was their duty.

[hanscastorp79]

62. but they some of the consequences

Things happen, deserved or undeserved, so it really doesn't matter.

As for evading the draft being a moral choice, it was. As for not evading because of your family, what exactly do you mean? You couldn't leave your family and go to Canada, so instead you left your family and went to Vietnam? That's just a failure of logic. You were going to leave the country one way or another.

People have a moral obligation to break bad laws, and people with a sense of self-preservation have an even stronger motivation to break bad laws that endanger themselves.

I have no idea how having a family forced you to go to Vietnam. Was it kids and a house you didn't want to relocate to Canada, or was it parents who would feel ashamed that their son was a dodger?

[Warren DeMontague]

63. No one should have been put in that position in the first place.

But I have little patience for people who think somehow they're well placed to armchair quarterback the difficult decisions someone may have made some 45 years ago.

If it had been me- it wasn't- I know what I think I would have done, but I can't really be sure. Thankfully, that bad war is long over, and so is the draft.

But a lot of people voluntarily went to places like Iraq, out of economic desperation. I think the Iraq invasion was misguided and morally unjustified in many of the same ways as our involvement in Vietnam. What is your opinion of the people who served there?

And out of curiosity, how old are you?

[hanscastorp79]

67. we can agree on that

Of course nobody should have been put in that position. We agree there.

The people who went to Iraq and Afghanistan also fought an immoral war for an evil empire. the u.s. is not good. it was founded in slavery and genocide and not much has changed.

now that i'm living overseas, my greatest fear is not that china will go to war again with vietnam, it's that the U.S. will attack Vietnam again and kill my family. and that a bunch of young, good obedient American soldiers will fight the war because they were lied to and they weren't smart enough to figure it out in time. Or maybe that when we start having kids, they'll get exposed to Agent Orange and be born fucked up. Of course, the world is falling apart anyway and birth defects caused by pollution / radiation are everywhere. hard thing to avoid.

I'm 33. I was extremely critical of both the Iraq and the Afghanistan invasions BEFORE the wars started. I wrote columns agaisnt the war, mostly for a college newspaper. I got involved in the anti-war movement to no avail. but what really bothered me was how the bush propaganda machine actually succeeded in changing public opinion.

when the war was first proposed, only the die-hards and religious fundies supported it (maybe 40% approval). by the time it started, upwards of 60% of Americans supported it. that's when i realized i didn't want to live here anymore. i do want to make the world a better place, but america is a lost cause. i just want out.

also, being called a traitor and a terrorist sympathizer for being against the war (i got that a lot) and having people ask me "why do you hate america" made me dislike the average brainwashed american. worse, now many of those same people who condemned me think the u.s. should get out. but i know they haven't learned anything because in 5 years when america starts another war, they'll be fucking cheerleaders again.

so like i said, i left the country. if i can't change it, at least i don't have to participate and pay taxes to it.

[coalition_unwilling]

73. The problem isn't that people thank veterans for their service, it's that they

don't thank war resisters for their service (with a tip of the hat to Daniel Ellsberg for prompting this thought).

Had I been single when the invasion\occupation of Afghanistan started, I probably would have joined you in exile. My wife has health issues that require her to live in a warm climate so we made the tactical decision to stay here and resist from within the borders of the Evil Empire.

But I understand and appreciate your stance.

[humblebum]

25. How do you know it made the world a worse place, if you do not

know what the world would be like had the war not been fought?

I thank all US veterans for their service. I have traveled back to Vietnam and have never been treated more warmly anywhere. The war is over.

[hanscastorp79]

28. Really?

You're correct - the War in Vietnam made the world a better place. And since he participated in it, he's a real hero!

[Warren DeMontague]

32. It was a horrible war, any rational analysis of it will come to the conclusion that it was

unjustifiable.

After helping the CIA fight the Japanese in WWII, Ho Chi Minh quoted from the Declaration of Independence at the end of that war, when he fulfilled the several-centuries-old aspirations of the Vietnamese people towards independence. We "repaid" him by handing his country back the the French, many of whom had sat out WWII or collaborated with the Nazis? Why? Because they were white, and Vietnam was "theirs". That was Mistake #1.

Mistake #2 was ever thinking the Vietnam war was about anything BUT national independence and soveriegnity.

Mistake #3 was when Eisenhower allowed Diem to cancel the promised elections of 1956, which would have given Ho Chi Minh the broad national mandate in both north and south that he clearly held.


You can't kill 64K Americans and upwards of 3 Million Vietnamese for no good reason at all, and rationally claim it didn't make the world a worse place. That's offensive.

When you went to Vietnam, did you visit any of the war memorials?

However, one can recognize that it was a bad war, an immoral war, an unjustifiable war, and still not denigrate the individual service of the people who fought there, often involuntarily. The blame for the policies rests at the top, with the decision-makers.

[humblebum]

34. Yes, I visited many of the war memorials in the the North and South. I also

did 2 full tours and a partial 3rd tour during the war, so I am quite familiar with the war and its aftermath.
You are entitled to your opinion, but you still have no idea what the world would have been like, had there been no war.

Would Vietnam have become killing field? Or maybe it would have undergone a cultural revolution like China that took the lives of tens of millions.

The fact is that you do not know. Would you have also decried the outcomes that I have described? And is the world a better place because of those events?

[Warren DeMontague]

36. That's ridiculous. Ho Chi Minh being elected leader peacefully in 1956 b/c most Vietnamese supported

him, not being somehow preferable to the exact same outcome being achieved some 19 years later, after millions had died?

The Killing Fields in Cambodia, the bloody reign of the Khmer Rouge, were STOPPED by the Communists of Vietnam, when they invaded Cambodia.

Thank you for saying I'm "entitled to my opinion", but it's backed up by historical fact.

[humblebum]

37. I am well aware of what happened, but the fact remains that you do not know. Pure opinion.

No, an alternative future is NOT backed up by historical fact.

There are any number of possible scenarios that could have played out. So stop saying that you know.

[Warren DeMontague]

38. I absolutely know that free democratic elections are preferable to wars that kill millions

Im not going to stop saying that, sorry.

[humblebum]

39. That is a foregone conclusion on which we both agree. But

no one knows what might have been the role of China or Russia in Vietnam had the war not occurred. Would Vietnam have become another N. Korea? You simply do not know. Given those possible outcomes it is quite doubtful that Vietnam would have become a participatory democracy.

[Warren DeMontague]

40. We will have to agree to disagree, then.

I strongly believe the end result in terms of government, etc would have been essentially the same (although, had we not alienated our ally and CIA asset Ho Chi Minh after WWII, vietnam may never have gone into the communist camp in the first place) but there is no way to know.

I dont personally believe a coherent case can be made that the deaths were justified or accomplished much of anything.

Unlike, say, Korea, where i think a strong case can be made that that war prevented a terrible outcome for the south.

[humblebum]

41. Here is the list of participatory democracies under Russian and Chinese influence in the years

after WWII along their respective borders:

Well, maybe Nepal.

[Warren DeMontague]

42. The majority of Vietnamese wanted independence, and they wanted Ho Chi Minh as their leader.

Like I said, the big mistakes prior to US involvement were screwing over VN at the end of WWII, and not insisting that the elections of '56 go forward.

[humblebum]

43. Do I need to reemphasize the influence of both Russia and China? It is probable that

China would have invaded had the Vietnamese remained independent after WWII, given the history of the two countries.

[Warren DeMontague]

44. Way down in speculation land.

I can't justify 3+ Million dead in a fight against the clear self-determination of a people, on the basis of what "might have" transpired. Can't.

The Chinese could have invaded in 1975, too. It's not like the US would rush in to stop them, after leaving Saigon in helicopters.

But, I'm done. We're not gonna agree on this.

[humblebum]

46. "can't justify ...on the basis of what "might have" transpired?"

Seems that this entire exchange is about what might have transpired if the war had not happened. Vietnam did not exist in a vacuum.

Given the general outcome of all other countries under Chinese and Russian influences, participatory democracy does not fit the paradigm.

And given that an estimated 130 million died in the 20th century in the USSR, China, and South Asia, it doesn't take much figuring to predict an outcome, given a certain scenario. But of course that's only a personal opinion.

[Warren DeMontague]

47. Except, Ho Chi Minh ended up running Vietnam ANYWAY.

So how you get a massively different outcome from a hypothetical where the end point is pretty similar to what actually ended up happening, I don't get.

[humblebum]

56. But, I thought you said he was all about democracy. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

58. I did?

[humblebum]

60. Well I think you implied as such:

"I absolutely know that free democratic elections are ... ."

[Warren DeMontague]

61. Diem cancelled the elections of 1956. That is indisputable.

Ho Chi Minh would have won those elections, that is a near-certainty.

The core point, here, is self-determination. Would putting Ho Chi Minh in charge of a united Viet Nam in '56 have led to a US Style Democracy? No, probably not. I would have led to a country much like what Vietnam ended up being in 1975, albeit after 3+ Million were killed trying to keep the Vietnamese from arranging their affairs as they themselves saw fit.

I really am not going to go around and around with you on this, though. Any further questions you may have can be answered by what I've already written in the thread. I think the Vietnam war was wrong, it was a bad war, and we never should have been there in the first place. That is my firm opinion and it is not going to change. I don't blame the soldiers for the war, but the war shouldn't have happened.

[hanscastorp79]

48. except vietnam "won" anyway and it didn't become an evil empire!

Yeah, being a russian client state was just as bad as being an american client state. i have a friend from chile who was a student activist when the u.s. overthrew their government and installed pinochet. she fled the country when her friends started disappearing. and this was just one example from one country. the u.s. did all the same shit russia and china did. so the shit happened on both sides. but it's always fun to say ours doesn't stink too.

i guess the ultimate point i'm getting at is that the U.S. isn't a democracy, it isn't a just country, and it's just as bad as the enemies we demonize. it's just too bad the soldiers don't realize this before they contribute to it by fighting America's wars.

YES, the generals, ceos, and political elite are more guilty and more responsible for the wars, but the soldiers did participate. hell, even taxpayers bear some of the blame. Which, incidentally, is why i left the country.

[humblebum]

57. I hope you didn't let the door #@%??! on the way out.

[hanscastorp79]

65. and i fed the cat first, too

[hanscastorp79]

64. what are you talking about?

Humblebum,

How do you know what China and Russia would have done? When I said the war made the world a worse place, you actually told me:

"no one knows what might have been the role of China or Russia in Vietnam had the war not occurred. Would Vietnam have become another N. Korea? You simply do not know"

So now you know China would have invaded had their been no war?

What I know is that the war did happen, and afterwards, China actually did attack Vietnam in 1979. They didn't stay very long.

My point is that you're starting to get all Star Trekkie alternate history here. Not a good way to have a discussion.

[hanscastorp79]

51. participatory democracy?

It's quite doubtful that the United States is a participatory democracy.

[Warren DeMontague]

55. Please, elaborate.

[hanscastorp79]

68. seriously?

The corporations run the whole show. That's pretty obvious.

Secret police infiltrate every protest and grassroots movement. Protesters get arrested and beaten. Activists are constantly monitored. Not every vote counts - voter suppression is huge in this country. Also, the first election I voted in, the guy who got the most votes didn't win... in a 2 party election, this seems like a problem... not that there's a huge difference between the 2 parties anyway. the will of the people is usually ignored. consider healthcare - most polls indicate that the majority of u.s. citizens actually want a single payer, yet that option wasn't even on the table. taxpayer money is shoveled directly into corporate coffers.

seriously, if you want democracy, look to northern europe or a few countries in south america. the U.S. is a corporate oligarchy. i honestly can't think of many ways the U.S. is a functioning democracy. certainly it's not a model one.

[LanternWaste]

71. "Conjecture is the sport of the entertained rather than the academician." Ariel Durant.

I believe you're correct in admonishing one or another for an absolutist statement, as...

"Conjecture is the sport of the entertained rather than the academician." Ariel Durant.

But, as we have armchair politicians coming out the wazoo, I imagine we also have many armchair prophets...

[MindMover]

81. You might review history from other more reliable sources ...

Ho moved his government into the mountains of North Vietnam and began almost nine years of warfare, culminating in the French defeat at Dien Bien Phu in 1954. The state of war actually simplified Ho's political problems. Vietnamese did not have to be Communist to join the fight against the French, and the ranks of the Viet Minh swelled with patriotic volunteers. Also, the real political opposition was easily squelched by declaring them to be traitors to Vietnam. By 1954, Ho was the undisputed leader of the country. The Geneva Accords of 1954 provided for a national election in 1956 to determine the fate of Vietnam, an election Ho confidently expected to win, especially since the bulk of Vietnam's population was in the North under his control. When the government of South Vietnam, which was not party to that portion of the agreement, refused to play into his hands, Ho created the National Liberation Front for South Vietnam and began the second phase of his war for a unified Vietnam.

First, however, Ho ruthlessly consolidated his power in the North. Evidencing the fact that behind his carefully constructed façade of the kindly and gentle 'Uncle Ho' he was in reality (in Susan Sontag's particularly descriptive words) a 'fascist with a human face,' Ho massacred his countrymen by the thousands in a Soviet-style 'land reform' campaign. In November 1956, when peasants in his home province protested, some 6,000 were murdered in cold blood. With such actions, Ho proved he was a worthy contemporary of Lenin, Stalin and Mao Tse-tung, who had also built their empires with the blood of their countrymen.

By the time of his death on September 3, 1969, Ho Chi Minh was generally spoken of in the same breath as Lenin and Mao Tse-tung. He had certainly led his native Communist Party through almost 40 years of success, creating a state where none had existed before and devising a Communist government to run it. He was a national leader with strong internationalist credentials, having served the Communist Party throughout Europe and Asia for more than 20 years before his return to Vietnam. He led a Communist Party unique in that it had never had a major purge or a major theoretical dispute. As a young Communist functionary, he avoided Stalin's great purges of the 1920s and 30s. As a mature Communist leader, he steered a middle course between the Russians and Chinese in their great schism, offending neither and retaining the support of both.

http://www.historynet.com/ho-chi-minh-north-vietnam-leader.htm

[hanscastorp79]

50. but vietnam did "win"

what i do know is that vietnam did win, it did drive the u.s. out and become independent. and then it DIDN'T slaughter millions of its own people or try to take over the world.

and are you arguing that the world was a better place after the invasion of vietnam? killing 3-4 million vietnamese was a good thing? chemical weapons was a good thing?

obviously, if the past had been different, the present wouldn't be the same... but i think it's pretty safe to say that the war in vietnam made the world worse, not better... especially for the vietnamese people. call it an educated guess.

[hanscastorp79]

49. i mostly agree with you, but...

Look, I agree with your history and i mostly agree that the blame should be placed at the top... most of it. but it takes soldiers to fight a war. they did go, they did participate, they did enable. call it coerced or involuntary or whatever, the fact remains that they directly participated in it, and therefore they bear some of the guilt. they aren't innocent. that's all i'm saying.

think about the german soldiers during WWII - the common soldier didn't have much choice about invading poland. most nazi soldiers didn't round up jews, probably they didn't even want to know about it so they could wash their hands more easily of the whole affair. but they still fought on the side of evil. would you say that the average german soldier in WWII was completely innocent? i wouldn't. if you would, then it means we have a fundamental difference of philosophy on this.

[coalition_unwilling]

74. As many as 2-3 million southeast Asians died premature deaths

due to violence thanks to the war. Are you seriously maintaining that the world would be even worse had the war not been fought????

[humblebum]

75. No I am maintaining that no one knows what the world have been like had the

war not been fought. There are any number of possible scenarios. Any there is a strong possibility that many more would have died if the US had not had a presence in the area.

[coalition_unwilling]

77. Well, there is also a strong possibility in a quantum universe that

monkeys might fly out my butt at some point.

I simply fail to see how 'many more would have died' had the U.S. and its puppets allowed the Geneva agreement of 1954 for national elections to proceed. North and South would have been unified under Ho's leadership. Are you implying that Ho would have somehow gone all Khmer Rouge on the people of South Vietnam?

[humblebum]

85. You are just kinda out there in la la land aren't you? The fact is

you do not know what would have happened. What we do know is that tens of million did die inside of China in the 20th Century. And of course we know that they would never try to make an impression on any country on their borders. Tibet? Taiwan?

[coalition_unwilling]

86. China? I thought we were discussing Vietnam (not China). Now

who's living in La-La Land? Time to put down that opium pipe, my friend.

N.B. I do live in Los Angeles, CA.

[humblebum]

89. Well obviously you haven't been following the conversation here from la la land.

[coalition_unwilling]

90. On second thought, maybe I'll take up my opium pipe and move to Xanadu.

[Scootaloo]

78. Actually, you're alluding that you DO know what would have happened

You keep pushing that Vietnam was going to become some dystopian mess under the heel of China's boot, full of dead people and all this, and you poo-poo anyone who points out how unlikely that is.

You are pushing this nonsense to justify the murder of several million Vietnamese, and tens of thousands of American soldiers.

Maybe you should stop before you hit bottom.

[humblebum]

84. Oh yes, we know the Chinese would never have any expansionist aspirations. LOL

[hanscastorp79]

19. then i won't imply - i'll just say it

I'm not saying that he shouldn't receive help, but I do believe that anyone who participated in the invasion - even those who were drafted - did enable the war to happen. Certainly they weren't guilty of starting it, but they fought in it.

Why not second-guess? Those who don't learn from history repeat it, right? Well, currently the U.S. is involved in invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. The soldiers participating in those immoral wars were mostly drafted by poverty and limited opportunities at home. But that doesn't change the fact that those wars are able to happen because of their actions, just as Vietnam was able to happen because decades ago, people just like them went halfway around the world because the government told them to.

Are you saying we should only blame the politicians?

But yes, I do agree that EVERYONE exposed to Agent Orange - soldier and civilian alike - should get help.

[humblebum]

27. Let's just hope you do not require the services of the US military someday. nt

[hanscastorp79]

69. I fear U.S. imperialism far more than other countries

I don't live in the U.S. anymore. Actually, one of my big fears is that America decides to invade whichever country I eventually settle down in. It'll probably be Vietnam... and I know what it looks like when America decides to invade Vietnam.

[humblebum]

70. It is not the influence of the US that Vietnam is mostly concerned about today.nt

[RKP5637]

54. Well said! A lot of people got dragged into that war. Imagine Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. with a

draft these days, a lot of unwilling participants would get dragged in ...

[humblebum]

76. If we had had a draft now, those wars would be long over because the public would

not put up with such a protracted loss of life.

They would have been marching and protesting many years ago. And I think that's the reason a draft for Iraq and Afghanistan was never implemented.

[RKP5637]

82. Exactly my thoughts too! Many of those that wave the flag for war lose no skin in

the game, so it continues on and frankly out of sight of most Americans. And the MIC for profit grows and grows and more fear is spread about "them" that are gonna get us. It's a huge profit center for the most part IMO.

[dixiegrrrrl]

15. Whoa there!

Many many people were sent to Viet Nam beginning in 1964......as "advisors".
Few of them had any idea what they were getting into. The war was not in the public awareness for several years.
And there were countless reasons guys ( mostly) entered the military in the 60's.
Many of them came home to join the protests BECAUSE they had found out the truth only after being over there.
I recommend reading some history, or better yet, talking to people who were around in the 60's, as I was.

[hanscastorp79]

22. I've read plenty of history and I know plenty of vets

You say that few of them had any idea what they were getting into... that's my point exactly. When someone gives you a gun and tells you to go halfway around the world to kill, you have a moral obligation to question it and get some real answers BEFORE you go. Most of the people who went didn't understand what was going on, they just followed their orders. This was the wrong thing to do. Indeed, many of them were actually more afraid not to go (scorn from their community, families, jail, etc.) then they were to do. That still doesn't excuse their participation. Since when is doing the right thing always easy?

As I mentioned in another response, the U.S. is currently involved in 2 ground invasions, again for dubious reasons. Once again, the soldiers joined for a variety of reasons. Once again, the civilians living in those countries are the ones really suffering. Once again, we only blame the leaders and let the soldiers completely off the hook. Once again, the people who serve didn't know all the details before they went...

As for the soldiers who came home and joined the protests, good! They did the right thing eventually. But that doesn't change the mistake in going in the first place.

I recommend you trying living in Vietnam as it is today, as I am doing. Hang out for 5 minutes in HCMC and you'll see people with Agent Orange deformities. Drive around Danang and you'll see them, too. Even now, every so often a farmer steps on a landmine or an unexploded bomb.

I know that Vietnam veterans were a curious mix of part victim, part victimizer. We should feel sympathy for them as victims, but we should still examine their participation in the war. If everyone had refused, it wouldn't have happened. Be the change you wish to see, aye?

[WooWooWoo]

35. sigh

i understand what you're trying to say, though its not in any way a rational argument.

[coalition_unwilling]

79. I've been sympathetic to your positions up until now and agree

with you here in principle that people should question their 'orders' and the authorities who are issuing those 'orders'.

Against that, though, I think it is important to place Vietnam in the historical context of the Cold War and the shibboleth (big lie) of a monolithic communism bent upon world domination. While it is true that LBJ's advisors knew this was a lie, that knowledge did not stop them from propounding it (and its variants of the so-called 'domino' theory) in public. Are you really going to criticize gullible 18-year-olds for believing what their elders told them, at a time when America's cherry had yet to be busted? If so, I think you're taking a Puritan stance which, while admirable in its intense ferocity, lacks something of the 'milk of human kindness' towards working class kids who were almost as much the victims as the Vietnamese they were sent to kill.

[Webster Green]

26. Jeez. That's a fucked thing to say to a veteran.

I volunteered to go because I was fucking brainwashed. A lot of people were. I figured shit out pretty quickly though, and by 1967, I was on the front lines of the anti-war movement.

I got Hodgkins disease from agent orange, and luckily found it early enough to beat it. Been in remission since 1978.

[hanscastorp79]

29. good

I'm glad you did the right thing when you got back, and I'm sorry about Hodgkins. And if you have children, I hope you teach them to always ask "What did they ever do to me?" whenever someone wants a war.

[coalition_unwilling]

87. I am glad you survived and beat Hodgkins. - n/t

[Posteritatis]

45. Judging by your tone, no, I don't think you're sorry at all. (nt)

[kestrel91316]

52. Perhaps because he's a law abiding citizen who loves his country,

right or wrong, just like you effing right wingers say we are supposed to.

Buh bye.

[hanscastorp79]

66. what?

first off, i'm not a right winger.

second, sometimes law abiding citizens are part of the problem.

third, what exactly does it mean to "love your country" anyway? think about what that means, please. it's one of those nonsense propaganda BS phrases that only exist to attack dissidents. kind of like "support our troops." you're completely brainwashed.

[kestrel91316]

83. People won't jump to the conclusion that you are a RWer if you refrain from

hatemongering like one. Oh, and if you learn the proper use of capital letters.

[LadyHawkAZ]

59. Wow

What I actually want to say in response to this:

I know that it sucks, but you did participate in an immoral war. You chose to go there instead of to Canada. These are the consequences for your actions.

would get my post hidden. I'm an Agent Orange baby. I have had endocrine and pulmonary issues since childhood and will the rest of my life. Nice to know I'm a deserved consequence. I hope your ears are burning from what I'm hollering at the computer right now.

[raouldukelives]

4. Glad to hear we are finally doing something.

It's going to take a long time. Hopefully they still have all the records of where it was sprayed so they can start cleaning & restoring all the jungles it was dropped on.

[dixiegrrrrl]

17. They sprayed 3 countires.

The jungles have certainly re-grown by now, but the stuff is still in the soil and water, I should think.

"the United States military sprayed nearly 20,000,000 US gallons of material containing chemical herbicides and defoliants mixed with jet fuel in Vietnam, eastern Laos and parts of Cambodia"

AND
it was not all just jungle they sprayed:

"The US began to target food crops in October 1962, primarily using Agent Blue.
In 1965, 42 percent of all herbicide spraying was dedicated to food crops"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange

[Citizen Worker]

6. You can bet we aren't doing this out of the goodness of our heart. Rather, the US wants military

bases in Vietnam to counter China and Cam Ranh Bay is the ideal location. We know because we had a huge naval and air base there during the Vietnam invasion and occupation.

[malthaussen]

8. You betcha

Screw the people, they can die. Bases... well, that's a different story.

-- Mal

[Warren DeMontague]

11. I don't see that happening.

I don't think that's what's going on, here. I really don't.

[dixiegrrrrl]

16. Yep..I agree.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact originally started out with just Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore,
but has enlarged to include Australia, Vietnam, and Peru, and later Malaysia...in other words, mostly Aisian Pacific countries. Countering China is pretty obvious when you look at a map.

[amandabeech]

33. I agree, too.

The desire to put the U.S. Navy back in CR Bay may be tied to the clashes in the South China Sea over anticipated oil and gas reserves. The sea area above the reserves is claimed by several countries, including China and Viet Nam.

Even the Philippines seems to be pining for a return of U.S. ships to Subic Bay to help push the Chinese Navy away from the oil and gas reserves.

As time passes, this will only get worse unless a satisfactory multi-party deal can be arranged. I'm not too hopeful about that.

[Solly Mack]

7. "How long will we be paying for Iraq and Afghanistan?"

We'd have to acknowledge our actions first.

[bemildred]

13. So, a long time then.

[Solly Mack]

14. Sadly.

Hey!

[boppers]

21. We still haven't paid for our invasion of the US.

Ask a native American.

[coalition_unwilling]

88. As Tonto might say, "What do you mean 'we,' white

man?"